Falsely Accused Catholic School Teacher in Philly *Finally* Released From Prison; Philly Media Doesn’t Care

Bernard Shero : falsely accused : Philadelphia

Falsely accused by Philly DA Seth Williams: Catholic teacher Bernard Shero

Philadelphia Catholic school teacher Bernard Shero, who was falsely convicted in 2013 along with the late Rev. Charles Engelhardt in a high-profile trial for child sex abuse that never occurred, is finally going to be a free man.

After being falsely accused of sex abuse by a lying drug addict named Danny Gallagher, Shero will exit prison after serving four-and-a-half years of a maximum 16-year sentence.

The news was first reported by journalist Ralph Cipriano at BigTrial.net.

An insider blows the lid off

Regular readers of this site have long known that Gallagher's claims of abuse are wildly false (see this and this for background). It is now an incontrovertible fact that the Philadelphia D.A.'s office – spearheaded by D.A. Seth Williams, who now sits in solitary confinement on multiple charges of corruption and bribery – orchestrated a malicious scheme against innocent men and the Catholic Church based on Gallagher's bogus stories.

And another fact we now know is that the Philly D.A.'s office knew all along that Gallagher's claims were preposterous, but it proceeded against innocent Catholic priests anyway.

How do we know this? Back in May, Cipriano was the first to report of a stunning 12-page affidavit written by the lead detective in the Philly D.A.'s office, Detective Joseph Walsh. In the affidavit, Walsh not only blows the lid off Gallagher's wildly false claims of abuse, but he also exposes how when he confronted Philly Assistant D.A. Mariana Sorensen – truly a major force behind the decade-plus-long witch hunt in Philadelphia – with the numerous problems with Gallagher's case, Sorensen retorted, "You're killing my case."

[***Click to read Det. Joe Walsh's affidavit (courtesy of Ralph Cipriano)***]

After conducting numerous interviews with Gallagher himself and the people closest to his case, Walsh made his decision: "I concluded that this information was a lie."

Of course, Shero's release did not come without a catch. Based in part on Detective Walsh's stunning information, Shero had appealed for a new trial. And prosecutors knew that the judge in the case was likely about to grant him one. Prosecutors also knew that a new trial would expose the fraud that they themselves had perpetrated; so they struck a deal with Shero. In order to obtain his release, Shero had to agree to plea no contest to crimes he never committed. As Cipriano has reported:

"[Philly prosecutors] struck a deal so the D.A.'s office could still pretend that Danny Gallagher was a rape victim and that Rufus Seth Williams' self-described 'historic' prosecution of the Catholic Church was legitimate.

"Even though Danny Gallagher is a fraud, Rufus Seth Williams is a criminal on his way to hell, and his prosecution of the church is a certified witch hunt that put four innocent men in jail, and one of those men, the Rev. Charles Engelhardt, died there.

"Truth may be a casualty. But Bernie Shero will soon be a free man.

"In Philadelphia, this is what passes for justice."

The Inky goes into hiding – again

Complicit in the imprisonment of innocent men has been Philadelphia's newspaper of record, the Philadelphia Inquirer. While the Inky repeatedly trumpeted the numerous bogus claims of abuse years ago, it has been stunningly silent in reporting the corruption and fraud perpetrated by the Philly D.A.'s office against not only the Catholic Church, but also against truth and justice.

After Shero was released from prison on Wednesday (8/16/17), we wrote to a bunch of editors and staffers at the Inquirer asking them if they would report Shero's release. A short time later, we saw that the Inky mustered up a measly 123-word wire story (since slightly lengthened) from the Associated Press.

Breathtaking journalism, indeed.

————————-

[ADDENDUM: Since writing this post, Ralph Cipriano has published two new posts worth checking out:

1. "Billy Doe Prosecutor: We Don't Need No Stinkin' Investigation" (8/17/17)

2. "Detective Joe Walsh Responds To ADA Blessington" (8/17/17)]

Comments

  1. Dan says:

    As Cipriano has reported, "Truth may be a casualty,,,,, In Philadelphia, this is what passes for justice."

    Dave's article states – "the Inky… has been stunningly silent in reporting the corruption and fraud perpetrated by the Philly D.A.'s office against not only the Catholic Church, but also against truth and justice."

    Injustice happens worldwide, Ralph and Dave. You guys cry when claiming an allegation of injustice or dishonesty against your church, and yet have absolutely no problem with your cult's injustices or lies against innocent victims. I'm sure there are thousands of victims of your cult of perverts, who didn't receive a fair shake or got some piddly few thousand dollar settlement to gain their silence. And publiar has been slandering me with all kinds of false accusations against children and mocking the things of God and not one catholic stands up to criticize his ignorance and garbage. We know he's a compulsive liar, but he's our catholic liar and mocker, and we love him and his slander towards non-catholics.

    As I once told publiar and will repeat for you and your church; "Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatever a man soweth, that shall he also reap."  Gal 6:7

    You may think it's not fair that innocent catholic men or priests might have to suffer for the churches malfeasance, but it's no more fair than the injustices I had to suffer from the cult's liars, both priests and lay liars (publiar included). And thousands more priests and lay members got away with their child molesting crimes, rapes, lies and slander. The innocent may pay the price for the guilty pedophiles and perverts that got away with the murder and destruction of innocence.

    Again, "You'll reap what you sow." "You have plowed wickedness, you have reaped injustice, you have eaten the fruit of lies. Because you have trusted in your way, in your numerous warriors, therefore a tumult will rise among your people, and all your fortresses will be destroyed…" Hosea 10:13-14    servant of the God of Truth and Justice

     

    • You know what is evil also, Dan? The fact that you rejoice at our failings and scandals, and regret when one of the accusations is proven to be false witness.

      That attitude is evil, Dan. You may fill you mouth with God's Word but your heart is far, far away from Him.

      ~Theo

    • Dan says:

      Wicked, evil people prefer to close their minds and hearts to the truth. They prefer not to hear the truth, so they won't have to correct their wrongs, they're happier to just ignore their faults. If I expose the false teachings and perversions of your cult, and some wake up to the truth and get the hell away from the disgusting bunch of lying sick hypocrites, then you're going to tell me I was wrong. Many priests claimed they were innocent to later find they were raping any little boy they could get their disgusting hands on. I'm not buying the lies of catholic hierarchy who backed and shipped pedophiles and perverts around so they wouldn't get caught. I don't "rejoice at your failings and scandals". I'm more repulsed by them. Take your head out of the sand and face the truth. I get no pleasure out of teaching those who refuse to hear. You're not Jesus and you won't be the one to judge how "far, far away [I am] from Him". servant of the One True God, no matter what any blind catholics think of me.

    • Mary Lamb says:

      So Dan you are saying when Jesus said to Peter "on you I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it" He was lying or just wrong?

    • Dan says:

      Mary, Are you sure Jesus was calling Peter the "Rock" on which He would build His church. There are theories Peter never came to Rome, his tomb is in Jerusalem and as I've previously stated, the Bible mentions no catholic church, no pope, no cardinals, no Mary worship or adoration, no sinless humans, no rosary and no babbling of prayers. All this aside, do you believe Peter the fisherman, follower of Christ who had no home, would morph into a pope wearing a triple crown and sitting on a throne? Look at this verse in Isaiah 44 and that should convince you that no human could ever become the "Rock". Jesus YES, human NO. I'm quoting the verse from the catholic Bible (NABRV) Isaiah 44:8-9

      "Is there any God but me? There is no other Rock, I know of none! Those who fashion idols are all nothing; There precious works are of no avail. They are their witnesses: they see nothing, know nothing, and so they are put to shame."  Last sentence sure describes you, peewee.

      I ask you Mary to read all of Isaiah 44 and hear what God says in regards to making statues in the form of a man and worshipping or adoring those figures. Don't let deceiving fools from the church deceive you into believing that you only adore, venerate and honor, but never worship statues. They bow to the statue of Mary, when even the Apostles would not allow anyone to bow to them, even when performing miracles. The catholic church is a religion filled with false teachings and nasty liars. I've come across many evil lying hypocrites from this religion. Most of them were priests and nuns that hate the truth. Be not fooled by their lies. One compulsive liar posts in this forum often. I can smell him coming. Read the Word.

       

  2. Jim Robertson says:

    "The Catholic church and truth and justice" in the same sentence? How easily history can be wiped out with a wish and a hope and lying

    Mr Sherro served his sentance. All your fussing is conjecture untill proven. He was released not because he was innocent but becauce he was found guilty; sentanced; and served his time. Untill more proof that your premises are true you got 123 words..

     

    • Colleen says:

      did you not read the story from the big trial? It was all made up, district attorney knew but let it come in trial anyway. regardless of what may have been done in the past with the Catholic Church. This man is innocent, 4 years life ruined

    • Jim, your lack of honesty is truly revealing. Shero did not serve his sentence. As every story I wrote noted, he got out of jail eleven and a half years early. He was sentenced to 8 to sixteen years, and had only served four and a half years.

      Try another tact; that one ain't working.

    • Jim Robertson says:

       Ralph, my "lack of honesty"?  Really?

      If he was paroled after four and a half years, the system considers him pretty much done punishment wise. He may be on parol but he's out of jail.

      When is your take on the subject expected to go viral as the truth, Ralph? Has the church set a date yet or will this all be "revealed" at the DA's trial? Just wondering. After all so much has been in play here for so long. You and TMR and Publiar and friends. Quite the set up.

      If you were a real journalist Ralphy, u would have looked long and hard at SNAP and it's massive failure to do anything for victims. You, had you looked, could have seen SNAP has produced far more failure for victims than it's ever given us success. Name even one victory produced by SNAP. It simply can't be done.SNAP has produced nothing but failure for victims. That's exactly what it was created to do. Especially if in the media SNAP is never looked at as being anything other than what it pretends to be. SNAP is a false flag. The evidence is all available. If u were a real investigative reporter. Ralph, which would be the bigger story to break yours or mine? Father Tom Doyle said it best. He said that if the knowledge of church funded secret committees got out, that the church would have an even bigger scandal than it already has.

  3. Janeen Fenton says:

    i love the Catholic Church, unlike the haters who've responded here.  One does have a point: that Bernard Shero, and Fr. Charles Englehardt, and Fr. Avery, and their Families, Friends, and beloved Parishoners, have suffered a terrible cross, which when joined to Christ's Passion, is redemptive suffering-nothing less! 

    I truly am saddened for real abuse by any Priest, but, there are are those falsely accused. Those who knowingly assist false accusers, as the Philadelphia DA's office did, have God to answer to! Danny Gallagher is one overtaken by evil, for whatever reasons, but I especially grieve for his Family. His Parents, obviously, did everything to raise good Catholic young Men. They've loved their troubled Boy, and been terribly deceived and abused by him! I will pray for them, and their other Son, and for Danny.

    Don't judge the Church by those who don't follow her teachings, but judge by the amazing, beautiful, holy, Souls that do!

    • Dan says:

      Janeen, I assume you label me as a hater of the catholic church. I hate their false teachings. I hate their idolatry. I hate their sexual immorality. I hate the harm they've done to innocent children. I hate their greed. I hate their pompous ceremonies. I do not hate brainwashed catholics who have been duped by a religion based on lies and lead by liars and deceivers. You can't turn a blind eye to the many faults of your religion and it's hierarchy, just because you think there are some positives and "amazing, beautiful, holy, Souls" attending there. I could put money on the fact that Satan worshippers probably "love" their leader and beliefs, but that doesn't negate the fact that they are following wickedness and deceit.

      "Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves. You will recognize them by their fruits. Are grapes gathered from thornbushes, or figs from thistles? So, every healthy tree bears good fruit, but the diseased tree bears bad fruit. A healthy tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a diseased tree bear good fruit. Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. Thus you will recognize them by their fruits." Matthew 7:15-20

      "Let he [or she] who has an ear let him hear." Read the Bible often and use the beautiful brain the Lord has given you to judge between the righteous and the unrighteous. Don't let deceivers and wolves in sheep's clothing dictate to you the misinterpretations of His Word.

    • Colleen says:

      Absolutely evil no matter who committed. This man was falsely convicted. People on the jury heard an astounding lie, great actor! Seth Williams allows it

  4. Publion says:

    And another chunk of the Philly case collapses. Whatever will the Abuseniks do?

    ‘Dan’ (the 18th, 1043PM) will try to make his own lemonade out of these historical lemons by a) trying to change the subject b) back to – had you been waitttingggggggggg forrrrrrrrr ittttttttt? – his own narrative of “your cult’s injustices or lies against innocent victims”. He’s also “sure” about there being “thousands of victims or your cult” still out there and so forth … and readers are welcome to judge ‘Dan’s reliability as a guide in all this as they may.

    Then another pericope to lend the appearance of i) divine authority and ii) intelligence.

    Then another self-advertisement using ‘Dan’s favorite cartoon narrative.

    Then another pericope to lend the appearance of i) divine authority and ii) intelligence.

    • Dan says:

      And these pericopes just coincidently happen to describe the modus operandi of your cult. "You'll reap what you sow." You've sown wickedness, reaped injustice and will eat the fruit of all your nasty "lies". Sounds like you and your cult. Not convinced? Let's add this one; "For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption, but the one who sows to the Spirit will from the Spirit reap eternal life." Gal 6:8  So the disgusting perverted child molesters of your cult, sowing to the lusts of their fleshly stench, shall reap corruption down to their very souls. Pay attention to the pericope stating, "the one who sows to the Spirit" and not the one who thinks he can mock the Spirit. And by the way, your accusations of Danny Gallagher being evil, a fraud or liar, kind of makes sense seeing he was raised catholic. Such a surprise that he'd become a compulsive liar, if your accusations are true. servant of the Just God

    • KenW says:

      Dan: if you hate my Church, then you hate me. Period.

    • Dan says:

      KenW, I hate all false religions. Period. If you're so brainwashed by your cult, that you think that means I hate you, then so be it. You wouldn't believe the crap, garbage and lies I've fielded from lying hypocrites of your church, and I still don't hate them. Feel more sorry for their blindness and ignorance, and have more fear for the direction in which they're headed. I don't get any joy out of seeing anyone headed for Hell's Fire, but in their stupidity, I believe they don't realize where they're going.

    • Dan says:

      Oops! Better correct that misspelling of coincidentally before the mockin' grammar police returns.

  5. Publion says:

    And from far left field JR returns (the 19th at 813AM) with what even for his usual level of mentation is a doozy: “Mr. Sherro” – JR mispellingly proclaims – “served his sentence” (correction supplied).

    What article did he read? Shero didn’t at all serve his sentence. Rather the DA – seeking to avoid a dangerously revelatory retrial that was going to be granted – offered Shero a deal: if you agree to sufficient facts and give up your right to further proceed to exonerate yourself then we’ll agree to a court letting you out right now.

    In an ideal world, the Shero character would tell the DA to go stuff it, stay in jail while the retrial went on to expose the DA and all the Abusenik skullduggery, and then be released fully exonerated.

    But Shero is not in an ideal world, he wanted out of prison as soon as he could (who wouldn’t?) and he took the deal, thereby avoiding the balance of 11-plus years of imprisonment.

    As surely as ‘Dan’, that other pea in the Abusenik pod, JR has his cartoon narratives and he is not going to let any reality get in the way of them.

    If this were vaudeville then the determination of these two troupers to stick with their respective shticks would be impressive; but it isn’t and they aren’t.

  6. Once again, Dave Pierre is leading the charge for sanity and justice while much of the media prefers to shape the news rather than report it.  Last week USA Today ran a front page story about 100 lawsuits and other demands for settlement against priests and the Archbishop on the island of Guam.  These lawsuits and the stories behind them arose only when the Guam Legislature passed window legislation to extend the civil statutes of limitations.  Such an effort has been rejected in most U.S. states.  The door was opened to rampant fraud just as it has been throughout the last two decades when no one was being vigilant.  This is not fake news.  I have documented multiple incidents of such fraud in "A Weapon of Mass Destruction:  Catholic Priests Falsely Accused" :  https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/weapon-mass-destruction-catholic-priests-falsely-accused-macrae

     

    • Colleen says:

      It is very sad, people take Advantage for $$$

       

    • Dan says:

      Let's see, A psychologically disturbed priest, sexually deviant, convicted felon of the sexual molestation of several John Does, is going to inform us who "is leading the charge for sanity and justice". This stuff gets more laughable by the minute. Did any of you catholic truth finders ever read the Attorney Generals Report or pay any attention to the judges final statements in regards to this child grooming predator. Guilty as charged! I wish more priests and perverts would have gotten their just due with such a sentence. This world may have been a safer place for our children.  servant

  7. Dan says:

    The only Cartoon Time "narrative" being played here is the one of deception, denials, lies and excuses, for the pedophiles and perverts of your sick disgusting Kathlik Klan. servant of Truth

    • J says:

      Dan, I used to be just like you. But if you take a second you will find plenty of scandals from your cultic brand of pseudo-Christianity. So if Catholicism is wrong due to scandals then SO ARE YOU. You are a hateful hypocrite. You are even ignorant, the Klan hated Catholics and was a solid Protestant organization. Fortunately I came to my senses and joined the Catholic Church. You are a servant of the Father of Lies not the truth.

    • Dan says:

      Drank the Kathlik Kult Kool-Aid, did ya J-bird. You "used to be just like" me? Impossible! I could never backslide enough to become a catholic. How could someone truly saved by the blood of Jesus Christ, turn their back on God's truth, to bow down to worship a false goddess, the "Queen of Heaven". How does a cult plagued with lyin' deceivers, idolators and pedophile perverts, have members with the guts to call others ignorant or hypocrites. I belong to NO religious organizations of hypocrites. When I called your cult the Katlik Kult or Katlik Kult Klan, I was in no way comparing them to the KKK. The KKK is an obviously evil bunch, whereas the catholic church is worse, because they are what Jesus described as "Wolves in Sheep's Clothing". They deceive their followers into believing that they are the One True Church, and while duping the parents, they're raping their little boys. If you're under the impression that this isn't the work of wicked Satan, then you must be servant to the Father of Lies. Would you prefer the Mother of Lies, Queen of Heaven, Immaculate Mary, sinless, Assumed into Heaven. These are all lies, but you have the nerve to claim I'm a servant of the Father of Lies. Do you repeat your prayers like the heathen do (rosary), so you get special indulgences in purgatory. More outright lies. Try not to drown in that Kathlik Kool-Aid.

      Adore, Venerate, Honor or BOW to anyone but Him and His Son, and you have broken the first and most important Commandment in the Book. You might want to think before you call another ignorant or hypocrite. You brainwashed blind catholics can't even imagine how close I am to my Father.   servant of the One and Only True God

  8. Jim Preisendorfer says:

    This is awesome news but let us not forget the innocent, falsely accused priest Fr. Gordon MacRae who continues to sit behind the stone walls of the New Hampshire State Prison for 23 years. If you haven't heard of his case it's time that you did http://www.thesestonewalls.org.  You will be shocked to read of the lies and inconsistencies in his trial and those after the fact.

  9. TigressLily says:

    I was born & raised Catholic, attended 12 years of parochial school, and was alone many different times with various clergy and staff of those schools and my local parish. Guess what..I never once suffered sexual abuse by the clergy or staff… But I did suffer it from a couple of my male classmates in the alley behind the school. I did suffer serious sexual abuse at the age of 9, over many weeks, by two (blood) sisters, in their home, who forced me and their little brother to do “things.” Random babysittersSuffered also took know than their share of my personal space and my body..I was so young, so often abused. Two more times at college I was assaulted… Once while on a simple 10-minute walk with a “nice” guy on the paths behind the dorm overlooking the river. Several of my female friends had been sexually abused more than once from childhood. Those who abused me weren’t Catholic at all. They were secular. My point is that based on my own experiences, and these of friends from across the country and from elsewhere in the world, sexual perversions and sex crimes run rampant in all walks of life, in every financial class, in every group, by both male and female perpetrators, and has been running rampant for at least forty years.

    • Dan says:

      You also said you weren't abused by catholics. If they were male classmates, wouldn't that mean they were going to catholic school with you, so they would be catholic and not secular? Also two (blood) sisters, wouldn't that mean they were catholic also?

      Publiar, you could learn a lesson from this on how you question a person without falsely accusing them of things they did not say or do. Adding with your own assessments, possibilities or probabilities is not considered questioning, it would only be considered adding with lies, something you're apparently unaware of. I ought to charge you for all the things I've had to teach you, both Spiritual and worldly knowledge. Don't worry, I'm not expecting a thank you from someone like you.   servant and teacher to the unlearned ignorant

       

    • Jim Robertson says:

      Yea? So what, Tiger Lily? You abuse u lose. Just because the other people weabusive doesn'tn't let the priest or cleric off the hook.

       

  10. Dan says:

    Sorry for all the abuse you had to suffer. You must remember that priests or male staff of the church preferred male victims 80% of the time. Glad to hear there was some catholic school kids that weren't molested. You cannot compare the malfeasance of the church to the sexual abuse in general society. There is no excuse for any clergy or religious who harm or sexually abuse innocent children. They claim to be the Holy and Pure of God, and yet perform some of the worst disgusting nasty crimes against young children. This will not and can never be acceptable, among any who claim to be following the One True God. NEVER! PERIOD, or exclamation mark! Stay with the Word and God will give you strength through your trials. Take care.

  11. malcolm harris says:

    'TigressLily', on the 21st, is like a breath of fresh air. In the sense that her experience rings true in this polluted atmosphere of moral panic. Her account of growing up in a Catholic community is similar to mine. Because heard no accusations of sexual deviancy by priests. But children did hear about, and experience, sexual behaviour from other kids. Thankfully none of it was serious, and we put it down to the rough and tumble of growing up, in an imperfect world.  When I  finally reached maturity, and learned something about people, I reflected that the nuns and priests I knew were amongs the finest individuals I had ever met. To fail to defend them now would be like a betrayal… of the people I admired most of all.

    • Dan says:

      Malcolm, I'd say in regards to the catholic pedophile and perverted priests and their bishop excusers and enablers, it's more a case of a "polluted atmosphere of moral" ineptitude.

  12. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 20th at 1206AM:

    There is no “coincidently” (sic) about it: ‘Dan’s carefully-chosen and well-thumbed (if poorly grasped) pericopes “just … happen to describe the modus operandi of” … ‘Dan’s carefully-designed and lavishly nurtured cartoon delusions about the Church and about ‘Dan’ himself.

    The pericopes can describe the human failures and shortcomings of just about any human organization and even religious organization. If you are not wearing the oh-so-necessary speshull ‘Dan’-glasses.

    In fact, if you are not wearing the oh-so-necessary speshull ‘Dan’-glasses then the false-teacher and false-prophet pericopes can easily describe ‘Dan’, and quite credibly too.

    And if the ultimate ground and source of ‘Dan’s slavish indenture, i.e. his Fixed Delusional Syndrome, is not for all practical purposes an idol then nothing is an idol.

    And an idol deceptively and manipulatively dressed-up in the costume of God and Scripture.

    • Dan says:

      More ignorance and stupidity that doesn't even warrant a response. Actually that describes just about everything you post. Mockin' liar.

  13. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 20th at 1227PM:

    Here ‘Dan’ will assure commenter ‘Janeen” that he doesn’t “hate brainwashed catholics”. Noooo, really – doncha see? – he just hates Catholicism (and, all religions we recall; although it was them Kathliks who called the cops on him so many times).

    We can’t “turn a blind eye” to ‘Dan’s delusions, his accusations and his cartoon characterizations, and his queasily repellent personality and – ultimately – his deep-seated whackery. We can’t start the play on second or third base (or halfway to home plate from third) for ‘Dan’s convenience and the purposes of keeping his delusional show on the road.

    ‘Dan’ can put his money on whatever appears to him to be “fact”, but it demonstrates nothing but the fact that he should avoid Las Vegas and similar environs.

    And if ‘Dan’ doesn’t realize that for all practical purposes he doth “love” his indenture to his delusions, then ‘Dan’ needs to get out more. And not to harass people with his delusions either.

    And if what we have seen here on this site from ‘Dan’ is in any way characterizable as the fruitful workings of “the beautiful brain the Lord has given” … readers may judge as they will.

    • Dan says:

      Why is it that you feel the need to back up any catholics that post in this forum. They take their shots at me and I set them straight and you think you're obligated to play some catholic comic-con cartoon character to fly to their rescue. If they have a problem with what I've returned, why not let them take some more shots at me. They could probably do a better job responding rather than your nonsense and garbage.  servant

  14. Publion says:

    On the 21st at 511PM ‘Dan’ doth assure commenter ‘Ken W’ that ‘Dan’ doth “hate all false religions”.

    As far as can be gleaned from his material here, that would include all religions, or at least all those of Christian derivation. Would ‘Dan’ care to name any religions, especially of Christian derivation, that are, in his opinion, n-o-t “false”? That should be interesting.

  15. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 21st at 857PM:

    Here ‘Dan’ – no doubt unintentionally – reveals just how far gone around the bend he has gone when it comes to plop-tossing under cover of (mimicking) rational mentation: He tells ‘Tigress Lily’ that she “also said you weren’t abused by Catholics” (from which mis-reading of her comment he can then conveniently launch into his usual type of stuff).

    But ‘Tigress Lily’ had actually said (the 21st at 1051AM) “I never once suffered sexual abuse by the clergy or staff” (italics mine).

    Thus “if they were male classmates” – it apparently has to be pointed out to ‘Dan’ – then they weren’t “the clergy or staff”.  Ditto the other persons she mentions.

    • Dan says:

      Once again we see a fine display of publiar's mental acuity, while he attempts to accuse others of those deficiences. I understand your reading comprehension problem, but plain as day 'Tigress Lily' stated, "Those who abused me weren't Catholic at all. They were secular." I know it was a long paragraph for you to understand, but for you to criticize me when you're absolutely wrong again is laughable. You better work on your reading comprehension there, Mr. Know-It-All. You sure have a talent for making yourself look stupid.  servant

  16. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 21st at 857PM:

    On the basis, then, of that howler, ‘Dan’ plows on by lecturing me on “how you question a person” … in response to which I would insist that the first step in questioning a person is to make sure you have an accurate conception of what they have said or written. Which ‘Dan’ precisely has not done in regard to the ‘Tigress Lily’comment.

    He then tries to fill-out his mimicry by further discoursing on how “adding your own assessments, possibilities or probabilities is not questioning”. No, such “adding” isn’t the questioning-step and nobody – certainly not I – ever said it was.

    But once you question, then you have to assess the (accurately-quoted) statement for internal coherence and correspondence to known facts. But this is precisely what ‘Dan’ ever seeks to prevent and preclude in regard to his own cartoons (whether stories about his misadventures or his Scriptural assertions).

    Instead, he merely wants people to accept not only a) his stuff but also b) his preferred interpretation of his stuff. Thus that coherence/correspondence assessment step causes ‘Dan’ to recoil like a vampire from holy-water.

    • Dan says:

      Publiar oinks, apparently at himself based on my previous comment, "I would insist that the first step in questioning a person is to make sure you have an accurate conception of what they have said or written." Maybe you should take your own advice and then keep your big mouth shut so you won't get your foot stuck in it. Now be a good little peewee and drink your Kathlik Kool-Aid and eat your popcorn while we get a "howler" out of the next set of Cartoon Time ignorance you'll be posting. You're such a joke!

    • Dan says:

      Let me see if I can clear this up for you. As I've stated so many times and your material has proven, your "assessments, possibilities and probabilities" are nothing of the sort. They have been total lies against me and absolutely unfair, mean-spirited and understandable coming from one of many catholic compulsive liars. Still doesn't make it right.  servant

  17. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 21st at 857PM:

    Readers familiar with ‘Dan’s stuff here can judge as they will whether his ‘teaching’ of “both Spiritual and worldly knowledge” is worth the price of admission, even as he has now proclaimed himself to be not only “servant” (of whatever it is that appears to him in his bathroom mirror séances) but also “teacher to the unlearned ignorant” (which is probably a task best performed in his bathroom mirror).

    • Dan says:

      By the way, I haven't been charging for my teaching or advice, but just like God's free offer, the ignorant think that if it hasn't a monetary value than they don't want to accept it. Shame on you. Not my problem. The Church (and I don't know why you think it's capitalized), will gladly charge you alot of money for all their stupid idols, literature and trinkets, and get away with paying no taxes. You can explain to God how you wasted all your money in order to lose your soul. I'm sure he'll look at that like you were one of his "wise servants". Hope I'll be able look upon your lying guilty face come Judgment Day.  servant of the Almighty

  18. Dan says:

    When I start my school for the unlearned ignorant, you'll be the first student, but that would be a good reason for no other students or teachers to show up. I'll line the walls and ceiling of the toilet with mirrors for you and you can impress yourself with your longwinded ignorance and stupidity for the rest of your days, Mr. Legend In Your Own Mind.   servant and teacher of the severely unlearned ignorant

  19. Publion says:

    On the 22nd at 1134PM ‘Dan’ will use the ‘J’ comment (of the 22nd at 249PM) to clutch his pearls u declare that “J-bird” must have been drinking “the Kathlik Kult Kool-Aid”; this from the prime and sole purveyor of the ‘Dan’-verse Cult-of-One Kool-Aid.

    He then declaims that he could “never backslide enough to become a catholic”. Was ‘Dan’ not a Catholic to begin with, according to his self-narrative? Or at least according to one version of it?

    But this bit then provides the pretext for rehearsing yet again all of his favorite bits about worship and idolaters and lies and so on and so forth.

    And we note that ‘Dan’ has evaded the question as to what religion – if any – he considers to be true and not false.

    This isn’t surprising because really ‘Dan’ has evaded any and all religions and has simply created the delusional alternative of a ‘Dan’-church, with himself as i) pope, authorized – but of course – by “the One and Only True God” (so he can denounce and pronounce) and ii) sole adherent (so he can’t be voted out by congregants who seem uniformly to find his physical presence and behaviors quite disturbing).

  20. Publion says:

    Moving beyond ‘Dan’s merely waving-away his problematic bits with the pronouncement of “more ignorance and stupidity” (the 24th at 1245AM) we come to ‘Dan’s of the 24th at 1253AM:

    Here he tries to evade his problematic bits by changing the subject and donning the Wig of Victimhood: why it is that I do bethump him by my “need to back up any catholics that post in this forum”.

    I don’t “back up” anybody; I do question so very much of ‘Dan’s material because it has numerous problematic aspects and elements.

    At the bottom of which problematic aspects and elements is the fact that he – by operation of his deliberate and carefully-designed deceitful systematic twisting of Scripture – pretty much makes himself the classic example of a “false teacher” and “false prophet” and “deceiver” and so on, such that his material has to be assessed and exposed for the whacky ranting that it actually is.

  21. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 24th at 1253AM:

    His sense of being victimized in all of this apparently stems from his presumption that – had you been waittingggg forrr itttttttt? – when he puts up stuff then that is merely to “set them [i.e. readers] straight”. Which is a fallacious presumption indeed.

    He also whines about my even commenting on stuff he addresses to other commenters. It is the right of a commenter to ignore material and many may choose to do so when ‘Dan’ wants to “set them straight”.

    But I don’t like to let whackery pass unremarked and it’s an open forum. And so much of his stuff is so nicely indicative of a lot of whackery that’s out there on the Web and the opportunity ‘Dan’ thus provides (unintentionally, of course) is really too good to pass up.

  22. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 24th at 110AM:

    Here ‘Dan’ wants to deal with my comment (the 23rd at 348PM) in regard to the ‘Tigress Lily’ comment (the 21st at 1051AM).

    My point had been that the ‘Tigress Lily’ comment had specifically pointed out that she had never been abused by “clergy or staff”.

    ‘Dan’ had tried to salvage some of his cartoonery from that inconvenient assertion by pointing out that her “male classmates” (at her parochial school) abused her and thus “Catholics” (cap supplied) abused her, which is about as much as he could do to tie-in Catholics and the Church and abuse.

    But what of relevance can be made of this gambit of his here? That the school somehow ‘taught’ abuse though the “clergy and staff” never practiced it? That only in Catholic schools do boys abuse girls? That abuse of schoolgirls by schoolboys is a specifically Catholic problem?

  23. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 24th at 110AM:

    And then he introduces a quote from ‘Tigress Lily’ that states that those who abused her “weren’t Catholic at all”.

    Since Catholic schools have not limited themselves to only Catholic students for quite a while (since after Vatican 2, surely) then we have the statement from ‘Tigress Lily’ (quoted by ‘Dan’ himself) and the fact that the boys might not even have been Catholic to begin-with.

    But even if the boys at the school were indeed Catholic and her quoted statement was made only in regard to subsequent abusers that she listed, then my first point from my comment of 1155AM applies.

    Thus … just whose material on this point is “laughable” and “absolutely wrong” and makes its proponent “look stupid”?

    ‘Dan’ does far more victimizing of himself then anyone here could ever manage.

  24. Dan says:

    Publiar's August 24th comments in a nutshell for the nutcase. First couple of comments larded with his favorite I'm not/You Are bits. Asks again what religion I think is true not false, when he already knows the answer. Why? Well because he's Mr. Know-It-All. Why do you even ask questions, when you always think you have all the answers? And once again demonstrating his own wackiness, the whackjob spends his last two comments making more excuses for his ignorance and stupidity. I just asked 'Tigress Lily' the questions and if anything would think she would know the answers, not you. Like I said, must you feel obligated to "back up" and even answer for all catholics? He ends with another question, "Thus … just whose material on this point is 'laughable' and 'absolutely wrong' and makes its proponent 'look stupid'?" That would be you of course. Funny how you have trouble coming up with the answer to your obviously most stupid questions. And this is why you're BS is nothing but a joke. Laughable!  servant

    P.S. Also the reason why most of your ignorance and stupidity isn't worth wasting my time.

  25. Dan says:

    Publiar, Very telling how you prefer to avoid and skip over any discussion of an obviously guilty and convicted creep from your cult. And this is far from being the first time.

  26. Publion says:

    Well, I had put up quite a bit of substantive material yesterday (the morning of the 24th, 1152, 1153, 1154, 1155, 1156) – including another reference to ‘Dan’s revealing to us just what religion – especially Christian-derived – is n-o-t “false”.

    And what do we get?

    On the 25th at 423AM – cutting right through the usual deceptive and epithetical ‘Dan’ stuff and getting to the bottom line – we get, yet again, an evasion: it “isn’t worth wasting my time”, ‘Dan’ doth declare, on my “ignorance and stupidity”.

    But there is a sly bit before that concluding race for the wings: As to my asking again “what religion [‘Dan’ thinks] is true not false” ‘Dan’ inaccurately and deceitfully doth declare that I “already know[s] the answer”. No I don’t and ‘Dan’ has never answered the question.

    • Dan says:

      I've told you and you know, your religion and all manmade religions are all FALSE. Got it, all of them. Protestant, presbyterian, catholic, buddhist, hindu, orthodox, episcopal, Jews without Christ, Jews with Christ, mormons, jehovah witnesses, atheists and whatever ones I missed you can add to the list. They're all led by those who are wrong, greedy, self-righteous, idolatrous, pedophiles, perverts, adulterers, cowards, unbelievers, liars, at times compulsive liars, cheaters, back-stabbers, wicked, deceivers, unrepentant, unremorseful, unforgiven, degenerate, flatterers of their own kind and defenders of evil. I'm sure you can relate to many of those fine qualities, and it just so happens that your hierarchy commits these sins, especially sexually immoral ones against innocent little boys in such greater volumn than the others. Does that answer your question, you lying mocking jackass.

  27. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 25th at 440AM:

    Here, he attempts to resurrect a bit he had tossed up earlier on this thread (the 22nd at 936AM) which apparently didn’t achieve what he had hoped the first time around, so he’ll try it again now – since he’s kind of hard up at the moment for something to help him extricate himself.

    His earlier comment was a vivid bit of plop-tossing at commenter ‘Father Gordon J. MacRae’ who had posted a comment on the 19th at 251PM.

    Rather than address the gravamen of the MacRae comment, ‘Dan’ nicely and vividly demonstrates his plop-tossy predilections by merely attacking the commenter rather than assessing the comment.

  28. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 25th at 440AM:

    All we know for certain is that Fr. MacRae was indeed “convicted”. From what we have seen of Stampede court-convictions – as especially demonstrated in Philadelphia and in the legal contortions displayed by higher state courts in New Hampshire as they turned back MacRae’s appeals – there is more than enough to indicate the questionability of the conviction.

    Thus – to whatever extent ‘Dan’ has consulted the actual legal history of the MacRae case  and has not simply indulged in more of ‘Dan’s tea-leaf reading – the characterizations of “psychologically disturbed” and “sexually deviant” are also open to quite rational question.

    And didn’t ‘Dan’ recently on this very thread bleat that he couldn’t trust – among other entities – the courts? (And thus that he could only rely – clutching the sacred pearls – on God and so on.)

    • Dan says:

      I read the actual legal history of the MacRae case and stand by everything I said to describe the convicted felon, and some of those descriptions the church even admitted to. And you claim you never make excuses for the pedophile creeps of your cult and have the audacity to state, "there is more than enough to indicate the questionability of the conviction". You are one sick excusing and enabling creep of even convicted pedophile felons and it wouldn't surprise me if you were one yourself. You lying, deceiving, mocking jackass.  servant of Truth

  29. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 25th at 440AM:

    I will – for purposes of demonstration – formulate a bit using the ‘Dan’ template that he used against Fr. MacRae:

    Let’s see: a self-styled special servant of God with “secret” knowledge imparted directly to him by God and who claims a “spiritual” knowledge of the Bible that has never been credibly demonstrated, who has a record of six court appearances and six court-mandated psychiatric stays, who has evinced by act and word a tendency to choose children as well as adults as the targets of his ranting, and who has demonstrated notably queasy and repellent personality characteristics suggesting strongly an unripe, immature, hostile, verbally violent and under-developed personality, and who certainly has demonstrated some of the classic hallmarks of a Fixed Delusional Syndrome as evidenced by voluminous written submissions here, is going to inform us that commenter MacRae is “psychologically disturbed” and “sexually deviant” and cannot be trusted – whereas he, ‘Dan’, is to be considered a paragon of credibility, veracity, accuracy, and trustworthiness in all of his assertions, stories, accusations and claims about priests, the Church, Catholicism, Catholics, Biblical interpretation, religion and matters-divine generally. Had the courts or psychiatrists had the room in jail or a secure psychiatric facility then this world may have been a safer place for our children and for decent mature adults generally.

    • Dan says:

      And you're under the impression that you're one of the "decent mature adults". You are one rotten excuse of a human being, mocker of all things Spiritually true and the most immature, compulsive liar I've ever conversed with, you disingenuous insignificant peewee.

  30. Dan says:

    Every problem I had with your catholic cult was based on lies, slander and false accusations. I have never ranted against a single child. You have been the most disgusting catholic liar I have ever run across. To attempt to compare me with one of the sick pedophile creeps of your cult, as if I was worse, has to be one of the most evil, vindictive and deceitful things you've spouted yet. You're a disgusting catholic pig, lying, wicked, deceiving, mocking, creepy, jackass, filthy douchebag. The cult must be proud of your ignorance and stupidity, cast upon others.  servant of the God of Wrath and Vengeance upon Wicked Snakes

    P.S. Stick that verbal violence where the sun don't shine.

  31. Dan says:

    "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the way that leads to life, and only a few find it." Matthew 7:13-14

    Go on Mr. Know-It-All. Explain to the duped and deceived sheep of your cult how 1.2 billion followers are going to be among the few who find everlasting life. Let's see how you twist and manipulate that pericope, son of Satan.

  32. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 26th at 1230AM:

    He cannot name any religion that is n-o-t false because – in a curious circumlocution – “all manmade religions are false” (scream-caps omitted).

    Thus, apparently, only his own ‘Dan’-made religion is not “false”.

    And, one would have to add, the ‘Dan’-made “religion” is apparently also free of all of the failings to which human flesh and humanity’s crooked timber is heir. And on top of that, since the ‘Dan’-made religion has a congregation of one, then ‘Dan’ too – as both boss and congregation – is free of those failings. Is ‘Dan’ then not human? Now there is food for thought.

    Of course his bit here also presumes that Catholicism can be credibly characterized as “manmade”. And that the ‘Dan’-made ‘religion’ is not “manmade”. Readers may consider it all as they will.

    • Dan says:

      In one fine display of clinical projection, the deceiving longwinded queen of ignorance and nonsense, accuses me of circumlocution, as he continues to blow oxygen depriving smoke from his bottomless chimney.

      Keep trying to convince everyone that I'm a "congregation of one", if that gives you some sense of superiority, knowing your among 1.2 billion idolators heading for destruction if they don't excape your disgusting cult. There are thousands, if not millions of true Christians that are the real believers in this world, and not following greedy religions of hypocrisy. Are we perfect, NO, but we are the forgiven, because we haven't committed the innumerable, unforgiveable, horrible sins against innocent children, as your wicked bunch has. And that's just some of the terrible repetitive unrepented sins of the cult's hierarchy. servant of the Lord

    • Dan says:

      I left escape for you to correct so you can show your brilliance in correcting others (sic).

  33. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 26th at 1245AM:

    Here ‘Dan’ informs us that he has indeed “read the actual legal history of the MacRae case”. I may not be the only reader here who is recalls that once upon a time here, in a discussion of Darwinism, ‘Dan’ insisted that he was quite well-versed in the many aspects and convolutions of the Darwinist Question since – now that he gave it some thought – he recalled that he had written a 50-page paper on the subject … in grade school.

    Readers may judge ‘Dan’s assurances as to his achievements as they will.

    And if ‘Dan’ has indeed read the extant legal material in the still-ongoing MacRae matter and can yet still question my “audacity” in stating that “there is more than enough to indicate the questionability of the conviction” … then ‘Dan’s legal reading comprehension is on a par with his Biblical comprehension.

    And – but of course – he concludes with an epithetical riff. As if that coarse ploppery could improve the credibility of his claims and assertions.

    • Dan says:

      I understand Darwinism, but never claimed to be the Mr. Know-It-All on the subject. It was after all many years ago and I've found something much more fulfilling than listening to the world's fairy tales and fantasies. I'll leave those matters to the ignorant to discuss and ponder.

  34. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 26th at 105AM:

    Here ‘Dan’ would have us yet again accept that his only problem is that he has – through the most sustained run of bad luck – encountered an incredible amount of “lies, slander and false accusations”, especially from Catholics.

    He apparently doesn’t like his own plop-tossing template being used on him. But he does nothing to counter it, and is reduced to just larding his comment with a breathy epithetical riff of name-calling.

    He’s not a particularly nasty type of unripe?

    And his “P.S.” doesn’t demonstrate verbal violence?

    • Dan says:

      And for the umpteenth time the oinking publiar insists that I wasn't lied about, slandered and falsely accused by catholic liars like himself. Of course we all know he channeled his brain to be on scene so that he, the All-Knowing-One knows better than myself how everything went down. Why must you think that everyone must be the compulsive liar that you have displayed of yourself in this forum. There are obviously plenty of gullible catholics that are willing to buy into yours and your cult's ignorance and stupidity. Unbelievable!

      Can't you figure out that my response to you was just from being totally fed up with your repetitive lying, false assessments and ignorance. Yeah, I plop-tossed at all the lying plop you consistently toss at those you're unable to brainwash with catholic nonsense and excuses, and drag down into Satan's lair. We're my words Christ-like? Far from it, but don't forget that I'm not the Christ and never claimed to be. There is only one Christ, and no substitutes, little Christs or intercessors as your cult claims. This is outright blasphemy and idolatry against God and His Word.   servant of the Almighty

    • Dan says:

      How is one supposed to "counter" the slander against them, when all it creates is an opportunity for you to lard on more lies and false accusations? You don't accept or believe anything I tell you, and would rather falsely assess who I am and my beliefs in order to dispute and demean what I have to say, in hopes that brainwashed catholics will look to your Biblical misinterpretations and what you falsely think is wisdom and worldly knowledge.

      "The wisdom of the prudent is to understand his way: but the folly of fools is deceit." Proverbs 14:8 (KJV)

      "The wisdom of the sensible is to understand his way. But what makes a person foolish is dishonesty." Proverbs 14:8

      The Word literally speaks for itself and doesn't need my commentary. Anyone who tries to tell you that the Bible can't be taking literally, is attempting to fool you with misinterpretations, deceit and dishonesty (lies from liars).  servant of the One True God

       

  35. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 26th at 322AM:

    Here we get – had you been waittttingggggggggggg forrrrrrrr itttttttttttttttt? – a pericope. This one is about “the narrow gate” and so on.

    Is it possible that ‘Dan’ is actually trying to make the case that since the “gate” that “leads to life” is “narrow”, and yet there are 1.2 billion Catholics, then it won’t be possible for all of them to fit through that “narrow gate” … ?

    What … all at once? Just their souls or also their bodies? What are the physical dimensions of the gate? Perhaps he might then see if a traffic-flow study from LA freeways or Manhattan streets can be dragged in to add a patina of ‘science’ to  the question.

    This is the ludicrous direction in which ‘Dan’s witless literalism quickly takes the matter.

    • Dan says:

      "Long ago when I was creating this world and its people, no one was there to oppose what I did. But now the people in this world constantly sin against me, even though I have given them plenty of food and a Law that leads to wisdom. I saw that my world was ruined, and that the evil plans of people were destroying it. I was angry enough to wipe out everyone, yet I decided to save a FEW, like ONE grape in a bunch or ONE tree out of a forest. The rest will die! But I will keep my few chosen ones safe, because I have worked hard to show them how to live right." 2 Esdras 9:18-21

      Publyin' will not understand this quote from God's Word, but I hope someone reading the Bible and trusting the Lord can draw some wisdom and urgency from all of it's knowledge. "You shall know the truth and it shall set you free." My hope is that all would listen and come to know the priceless gifts the Lord God is freely offering to His chosen ones.

      Your questions are ridiculously stupid and immature and show your lack of Biblical knowledge or wisdom in interpreting the Lord's Word. Maybe this is why you think you're cute when mocking God, His Holy Spirit and His true followers. Your day when He will open your eyes to His Truth is coming, and I'm afraid it's not going to be pretty. servant of the Great One

  36. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 27th at 1240PM:

    Here, ‘Dan’ will try his hand at mimicry of psychological chops by declaring that he hath discovered “one fine display of clinical projection” in some of my material. This should be good; let’s see what we get.

    He opens with a string of epithets (“deceiving longwinded queen of ignorance and nonsense” and then the chimney-smoke bit) just to sorta get you into the mood – or, rather, into his mood. This is hardly surprising since if you are not in ‘Dan’s mood then you probably aren’t going to be able to make sense of his stuff.

    On, then, to his stuff.

  37. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 27th at 1240PM:

    But then … there is no stuff. He’s off onto a ‘Dan’-is-victimized bleat about his being characterized as a “congregation of one”.  But rather than either a) demonstrate how this is “clinical projection” on my part or b) demonstrate at least that he is not a “congregation of one” in his ‘Dan’-verse religious stuff, he instead slyly and quickly lard in something about my noting his being a “congregation of one” is somehow an indication that I am seeking “some sense of superiority” (i.e. – apparently – by noting that he is a “congregation of one”).

    And then that bit platforms a riff yet again on the “1.2 billion idolators” (i.e. Catholics).

    Then he claims that “there are thousands, if not millions, of “true Christians that are real believers”. And are we to imagine that they are all part of the ‘Dan’-verse ‘religion’? And just how does one define and distinguish “true” and “real” in this cartoon bit? (Short answer: they are “true” and “real” Christians if they agree with ‘Dan’s stuff and don’t either question it or point out its whackeries.)

  38. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 27th at 1240PM:

    And from a statistical-reliability point of view, the spread between a theorized “thousands” and a theorized “millions” merely emphasizes the cartoonery at work here in ‘Dan’s bit.

    And sure enough, ‘Dan’ then nails the cartoon switcheroo down specifically: he refers to all those thousand (or millions) as “we”.

    Then – no doubt unintentionally – he goes on to demonstrate his cartoonish theological chops: apparently as long as you “haven’t committed the innumerable, unforgiveable, horrible sins against innocent children” they you can be as not-“perfect” as you may be, because – had you been waitttingggg forrrrr itttttt? – “we are the forgiven”, i.e. so long as you don’t abuse children (or do a lot of those other things Catholics do – such as calling the police on ‘Dan’) then you can be and are forgiven everything else you might be or do.

  39. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 27th at 1240PM:

    Which cartoon also presumes that ‘Dan’ just absolutely and totally knows what is and isn’t “unforgiveable” in God’s mind. That bathroom mirror of his and the Divine Fax set up beside it must really be the locus of some remarkable and remarkably convenient goings-on.

    And this nicely illuminates the compensatory and evasive nature of ‘Dan’s essential delusional construction: even if he may be all the things he may well be, it’s all OK because he doesn’t abuse children and worship idols like Catholics do.

    Catholics and Catholicism are absolutely essential to ‘Dan’s deceptive and self-deceptive project: if he didn’t have his cartoons of Catholics and Catholicism, then people – and ‘Dan’ himself – would have to look at all the things he really does and says and is. And then his head would explode.

  40. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 27th at 1250PM:

    ‘Dan’s problem here was how to extricate himself from his prior claim about his grade-school 50-page paper on Darwinism. So he claims to “understand” it (readers may consider the reliability of that claim) but now – in a sly switcheroo to evasively change the subject – he’s “found something much more fulfilling” to do, i.e. constructing and ranting his cartoons about the Church and Catholics and so on.

    And – as I have often said – he admits that he finds his current cartoonery “much more fulfilling”. I don’t think his delusional cartoonery is most accurately described as “fulfilling” in any substantive sense. Indulging the cartoonery no doubt makes him feel better, but that feeling is acquired at the price of his connection to reality, human and/or divine.

    Which switcheroo (from reality to delusional cartoonery) he seems on some level to realize, since he also takes care to characterize anything not congenial or convenient to his cartoonery as being merely “the world’s fairy tales and fantasies”. Thus a fine example here of the delusional mind at work.

  41. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 27th at 112PM:

    Here ‘Dan simply repeats – “and for the umpteenth time” – his mere denial that he “wasn’t lied about, slandered and falsely accused” (by, we recall, them Kathliks).

    His denial is in his mind an utterly decisive ‘response’ that should and must preclude any further examination of his claims. It isn’t at all. When you look at how he goes off the rails merely in writing on a website, you can quickly imagine how he handles opposition in person (and thus so many have called the police on him).

    As to who may be a “compulsive liar” in all this, readers may judge as they will.

  42. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 27th at 112PM:

    And in an actual fine example of (no doubt unintentional) actual clinical projection, he quickly blurts out (clutching his pearls) “Unbelievable!”. How very true.

    In his second paragraph, he then tries to re-establish his desired stance on the high-ground by now claiming that “Yeah” he did do a lot of plop-tossing … but – doncha see? – that was only because he was confronted by so much “lying plop” (i.e. questioning of his many claims and assertions).

    And – in a further effort to somehow re-establish his creds and stance as being God’s speshull and spiritual Deputy Dawg – he even goes so far now as to admit that his “words” weren’t “Christ-like”, i.e. that one wouldn’t sense in reading his stuff that one was reading the fruits of a mature and spiritually ripened mind and personality.

    But – doncha see? – that’s just because he’s had to deal not only with so much “catholic nonsense and excuses” but also with – tah-dahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! – “outright blasphemy and idolatry against God and His Word”. (Because – doncha see? – when you question ‘Dan’s stuff then you blaspheme “against God and His Word” because ‘Dan’s stuff and God’s are pretty much one and the same.)

    • Dan says:

      One more time, lying about me is not questioning or assessing anything. It is lying coming from a compulsive liar. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

      And NO! Calling your pope Christ's representative on earth, or priests little Christs, or believing God needs an intercessor, let alone your favorite one being Mary, "Queen of Heaven", this is "outright blasphemy and idolatry". Absolutely having nothing to do with your poor questioning or false assessments of me. Why must you attempt to twist everything to your liking, even if it makes no sense?   servant of Truth

  43. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 27th at 145PM:

    Having perhaps realized in some nook or cranny of his mind where at least a shred of vestigial capacity to recognize reality yet remains that his performance here may not have been entirely as convincing as he would prefer, ‘Dan’ has now – had you been waitttinggggggggg forrrrrrr itttttt? – come up with a quotation from his Favorites pile.

    His selection is from an apocryphal text accepted as canonical by neither Catholics nor Protestants.

    There were originally four books associated with the prophet Ezra or Esdras. The first two were accepted as canonical and became what we now call the Book of Ezra and the Book of Nehemiah, considered as canonical by both Catholics and Protestants. The third and fourth were not accepted and became known as First and Second Esdras, both classified as apocryphal.

    You will not find First and/or Second Esdras in the canonical lists of the King James Version or the New American Bible; they – along with other apocryphal texts – do appear in a  separate sections of Bible translations that include “The Apocrypha”.

    • Dan says:

      1 – Why is there an imprimatur from the Archbishop of Wheaton in the front of my Good News Bible, if the Apocrypha in that book is not acceptable canon of your church?

      2 – If as you say it's not acceptable teachings of a cult of idolators, pedophiles, perverts, liars and hypocrites, does that mean it wouldn't be acceptable teachings of true Christians who don't subscribe to those horrible sins

      3 – And when you're speaking of Protestants, are we talking about those who think the only acceptable version of the Word is the King James Bible. I'm in absolute disagreement with that assumption, because I believe there is great Spiritual knowledge to be gleaned from cross-referencing different versions to really get an idea what is truth. Similar is true when you compare the different gospels versions with different authors take on what transpired. Just gives you a better understanding of what truly took place.

    • Dan says:

      May I also point out the obvious fact that both catholic and protestant theologists or the knowledgeable weren't terribly skilled in identifying some of the greatest wisdom and knowledge of the Lord. Esdras is full of brilliant wisdom that just might not be recognizable to those lacking Scriptural wisdom and unable to discern Spiritual things. It's no wonder that they continue in their disgusting sinful ways.  servant of the Lord

  44. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 27th at 145PM:

    So on what basis does ‘Dan’ tout this quotation as being “this quote from God’s Word”?

    At any rate, you have to have ‘Dan’s speshull glasses on to see in the quotation what ‘Dan’ wants you to see.

    He concludes – tunelessly – by trying to nail down what even he apparently suspects his own stuff has not demonstrably done: a concluding epithetical riff about how my “questions are ridiculously stupid and immature”.

    He likes to toss epithets and seems to think that they are capable of standing alone as both full rebuttals and full explications. That presumption enables him to indulge his parasitical I’m Not/You Are bit.

    Then a final God’ll-getcha bit, which is apparently ‘Dan’s favorite wet-dream that sustains him against the slings and arrows of outrageous and uncongenial and inconvenient reality. He can do that – doncha see? – because he is one of God’s “true followers”; ‘Dan’ knows that because his bathroom mirror tells him so.

  45. Dan says:

    In case my 3×5 from 8/26 @ 1:45pm wasn't convincing enough, let me give you another 3×5.

    God replied, "… Whoever has something that is rare is happier than someone who has something that is plentiful. That's how it is with the final judgment I have planned. I will celebrate over the people who have faithfully worshipped me and told others about me. I won't be sad about the crowds of people who will die. They are like fog, and they will disappear as quickly as smoke or a flame that blazes up, and then goes out." 2 Esdras 7;59-61

    Once again, the Bible literally speaks for itself, especially when God or Christ is speaking. Don't allow deceivers or liars try to manipulate the Word and convince you otherwise.

    • Pat says:

      Dan, I'm one of the 100,000 former Evangelical Protestants who become Catholic every year. We become Catholic because 1) we've done the reading, and 2) we're in pursuit of the Truth – where ever that may lead. 

      Anyone can fling out-of-context Bible verses around to make a point. I suggest – if you really want to know the fullness of the Christian expression – that you do what a famous 19th century Anglican named John Henry Newman did – become "deep in history." 

      And as he said, "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant." 

      Happy trails, Dan.

    • Dan says:

      Tell me Pat, am I to be impressed with the fact that you've jumped out of the frying pan and straight into the fire? That this change you've made to catholicism is a positive one, a religion plagued with idolatry, sexual immorality, cowards, deceit and liars?

      Several times when quoting Bible verses, I've asked that readers look at the whole chapter and even several times asked that you read the Bible for yourself, not listening to what you've been brainwashed as to the meaning, but letting God's Spirit and wisdom guide you to His Truth. I far from fling out-of-context Bible verses, but there are times when that's the most concise way of expressing what the Lord is saying. I'm already being accused of hogging this forum, and only want the lost to know God's Truths in as few words as possible.

      Jesus preached faith, hope and love, and was not impressed with the history or traditions of men. What it boils down to is who would you rather follow, the teachings of man or those of God? Happy trails to you, Pat, I hope they're not leading you down the wrong path.

  46. Dan says:

    Again your accusations as to my mental capabilities and your insistent mocking would only lead me to say something harsh, and I think I'll take my father's advice, that if you have nothing good to say, then say nothing at all. I will let His Word, that I know you will dispute, do the talking for me. This is my friends prophecy she received today. Take it or leave it, but it would be wise not to lie about it. This is the Word of the Lord -

    "We all have to deal with life. Sometimes He gives us troubles and suffering. Sometimes it's our own fault. The Lord wants us to love, but we would rather go against the Lord's Word and hate for an eternity. The Lord wants us to have faith, but we always find fault in His faith. The Lord wants us to have hope, but we think the world is smarter than the Word of the Lord. The Lord wants us to be patient with each other, but we don't let the Lord's Word settle it. We use our own mouth and tongue and we end up lashing out with words of hurt, that are demeaning to a person. The Lord wants our lives to be in His Word, but we don't want to accept the Word of the Lord. So who is at fault, it surely isn't the Lord. Well just take one guess."

  47. Jim Robertson says:

    Could the diests shut up and let the grownups talk for awhile?

    or are we to pretend the conversation here is one of unsullied chance.

    Dan and Publiar  areplants bigger than this jungle i e the real world could produce naturally,All by itself. No the God boys are just duking it out and at such great length on any and every subject TMR "reports". They talk so no one else can. This is Like Radio Not so free Catholic Pederasty! You sad fucks. No body believe anything about this site and the 2 jerks ranting on. Smoke do get in yer eyes.

    And morons, The Bible is just a fkin' book like all the other books u haven't read.

    There's no God no Heaven no Hell You've no proof for anything you want the rest of us to believe to be true.

    U got faith and that's all you've got. A Disney esque wish. That you expect the rest of the world to share along with you.

    Grow up! We're here. We suffer and die> So what?

     

    • Dan says:

      Jim, Not sure what I've done to you to deserve this treatment. I appreciate that I'm getting it from all sides, and yet I'm being accused of being joined to both of them. The Word even says how the world will hate you if you're His. Guess this confirms that what I already know.

      And nobody has stopped you from stating your garbage whenever you feel led to. Can't say I've really missed your atheist trash mouth. Feel sorry for your disdain for the one who created you and gave you the freedom to be your nasty self.  servant of the Creator, who also made you

    • Dan says:

      Correction – Should be, Guess this confirms what I already know. Beware everyone of the grammar police (publiar), unless you're catholic, because he'll never correct your errors or typos. I think he believes all catholics are infallible, especially himself.

    • Dan says:

      You consider yourself a grownup and are telling us to grow up? Many immature children aren't half as foul-mouthed as you. What gives you the audacity to slander or deny the Creator?

      "For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive his due for the things done in the body, whether good or bad." 2 Cor 5:10

      I've yet to read a version where Jim or catholics will be exempt. Best to all of you.

       

       

  48. Jim Robertson says:

    It sucks but rteally: so what?

    • Jim Robertson says:

      Gee Dan, I didn't realize that the god who created everything, including words, gave a flying fuck about cursing? Or does only "He" get to curse?

      I guess your punk god gave me the "audacity" ,the bras,s to say he aint there since "he's' the big puppet master in the sky. I have the audacity to deny the "Creator" because, according to you, I am "His" creation. "He" "made" me ,and i deny "him". Hence it must be "his will" that i know "he" doesn't exist.

      If the world hates you because you are "His" then can one assume all people the "world" hates are "His" kinda guys? Hitler must have been totally "His" according to your "logic" since the world hates Adolph so.

      "Nasty self". Where's that turn the other cheek shit? You are supposed to be doing? Neith you nor P-Joyboy here have never turned the other cheek, ever.

      So we have bad Christians debating "truth" without ever following the tenants of their faiths.

      And that's the moral high ground? More like a lack of moral depression which I think both of you really are, depressed, clinically. Why else the nasty P or the hyper Protestant Dan? I see no love from either of you yet you both to feign to worship the "God 'O Love" "himself".

    • Jim Robertson says:

      Correcting the "neve" above should read ever and "Neith" above should have an r on it's end.

      Dave Pierre, Why don't you have the ability for us to correct, post posting?

  49. Javi says:

    Dan, I want to let you know that God has Loved you from all eternity.
    He knows everything about you and your whole life. He sees it all in a single moment and he Loves you more than you can possibly imagine. He is with you right now
    And he knows what you are struggling with. Now the true church, the one established by Jesus Christ is One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic. There is only one true church but one may ask there are so many churches out there which is the right one. I am a Catholic and the Catholic faith teaches that we worship God alone, we pray to the saints to ask their prayers because they are in heaven for example St Paul and St Peter or St John. They are the friends of God and we ask them to pray for us just as we may pray for others in this life but we know that God alone is to be worshiped for He Is. Now there are so many beautiful things in the Gospels, something that comes to mind is when Jesus said, by this they will know that you are my disciples that you love one another as I have loved you. I hope and pray for you that you join the Catholic church. God came not to call the just but sinners to repentance. God Loves you.
    Re

    • Dan says:

      Javi, Thank you for your first few sentences, telling me things I already know, but It's always nice for all of us to hear. I wish you could have stopped there. Everyone thinks their church is the one true church. The Bible doesn't even have the word catholic, pope, Mary worship, Mary sinless, immaculate or assumed or repetitive prayer(rosary) in it's teachings. How can one claim to be the One Holy True Church when the main tenets of it's beliefs aren't even mentioned by Christ or any other time in the Bible? In word your church claims only to worship God, but in action you worship idols of all kinds. Do you think the Creator of the universe is somehow fooled or blind to your idolatry? I surely don't need joining a pagan cult in order to be forgiven. I'm forgiven by God himself and no man. I hope he loves you enough to open your eyes to the false teachings of your religion. Hopefully He loves you.

  50. Publion says:

    On the 28th at 455Pm ‘Dan’ will evade his ‘Word of God’ problem created by the 2 Esdras quotation by simply doubling-down and putting up another bit from 2 Esdras.

    If you read the quotation it seems hard to distinguish the material from a lot of ‘Dan’s other stuff, which may well be one of the reasons that neither Protestants nor Catholics consider the two Esdras texts as canonical: their content is too whacky and queasily violent and unripe to be considered God’s Word.

    The stuff would only be “convincing” to a mind similarly attuned. Thus ‘Dan’s attraction to it.

    And – marvelously – ‘Dan’ once again refers to the Esdras material as “the Bible literally speaks for itself”. The Esdras texts are apocrypha, they are not actually “the Bible”. But ‘Dan’ is in the plop-tossing cartoon business, not really the Bible business; to such a mind, facts that get in the way of the plop-tossing are merely speed-bumps to be zoomed-over during the joy-ride.

  51. Randal Agostini says:

    This seems to be a forum for "Dan," who we should pray for. If God is Love, why is the road to his heart an unatural path? God wants us to make a deliberate act – to choose him, before any other or any thing. Living in Christ is living in the Love of God, which is transcendant, which cannot harbor hate of any kind. There is no other church than the Catholic Church that has fostered more pathways to the love of God, yet it remains a home for sinners. 

    • Dan says:

      "This seems to be a forum for 'Dan,' who we should pray for." Really? Publiar has spewed more longwinded garbage and lies towards me in this forum, and I've just been responding to his ignorance. Why have none of you catholic contributors said nothing against him? Because he's one of your own? Why not waste your time praying to Mary for him. Why do you catholics presume you have a hotline of prayer to the Almighty God, and yet fail to follow His precepts? I will agree that your cult remains a home for sinners. In fact for many unremorseful, deceiving, perverted ones. They brag of all the good they have done, while destroying many families and lives of young innocent little boys. They are a sick pagan church which has duped and deceived many with their false humility and pompous celebrations of nothingness. Escape their nasty cult while you still have the chance. servant of the One True God

  52. Dan says:

    This message is for all you catholics out there. If you think that my telling you the truth is somehow hate towards any of you, than you really don't know myself or my God whatsoever. He wants you to open your eyes to the evilness of your cult, so he might save your soul from eternal condemnation. Show me one prophet or messenger of God in the Bible who wasn't persecuted by religious hypocrites or pagan idol-worshipping people. Go ahead and attack me like circling vultures, but my message is to save your souls and not because I hate you. You'd have to love people quite a bit to put up with the slew of lies and slander that I have taken from the wicked of your cult. Are you under the impression that I enjoy this punishment? You've got to be kidding.  servant of the Lord

  53. fern titus says:

    dan is a discriminate person he is not fit to live on this planet but on an island alone 

    pray for him and his soul

    • Dan says:

      Judging from your post, I can tell you're quite the astute and intellegent catholic. No worries, publyin' never corrects the grammar of members of his Kathlik Kult Klan. Very interesting name, though. Are you some kind of obscure Roman plant. Don't let Jim R. find out, anyone who isn't a trash-mouthed gay atheist like him, he thinks is some kind of plant of "the Church".

      By the way, what planet are you from? Actually, I wouldn't mind living on "an island alone", so long as you could promise me there wouldn't be any catholic liars shipwrecking, especially lyin' publiars. Please, I would appreciate no catholics praying for me or my soul. My God doesn't listen to the prayers of pagan idolators. And wouldn't you think that when Jesus taught his disciples how to pray, He would have added his own prayers to his mother if He felt they would be of some benefit? Stop listening to manmade religions and their fake, worthless prayers to their false goddesses and false gods. Mary has absolutely no role in our salvation and she is not the one who died and was punished for our sins. Pray to God and Jesus and the Lord God will answer your prayers.  servant of the Only True God

      P.S. If I was stranded on a deserted island, who would be around to correct your catholic false teachings? publiar? Jim? Well good luck with that!

  54. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 28th at 1005PM:

    Why is it so hard for ‘Dan’ to understand that the mere fact that he claims negative assessments of him and his material must be and are “lies” – especially in light of what he has unwittingly revealed in his material here – does not demonstrate anything at all?

    Short answer: because if his “lying” ‘solution’ doesn’t work then he’d have to face his many issues and then his head would explode.

    And then – just to plump up his comment – he’s off to the races with another repetition of some of his favorite bits, this time about the Pope and Mary.

    And it concludes with another pearly-clutching bleat, this time about my “attempt to twist everything” he says. Actually, I am trying to un-twist the carefully and deceitfully twisted material that is ‘Dan’s stock in trade. He is the “servant” of no “Truth” except his own ‘truth’ carefully and deceitfully designed to serve his own delusional system. And the only ‘victimization’ he suffers is what he has imposed upon himself by taking up that indenture to delusionality, to which God, the Bible and “Truth” are simply harnessed like mules to his wobbly wagon.

    • Dan says:

      NO, publyin', your negative assessments are lies. Time you come to terms with your own delusions, YOU ARE AN INSISTENT, COMPULSIVE LIAR. PERIOD. servant of God's Truth

    • Dan says:

      And by the way, is an exploded head a prerequisite to becoming a catholic.

  55. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 28th at 1025PM:

    Here he will mimic competence by proposing a set of questions.

    As to the first question:

    There is no such person or office as “the Archbishop of Wheaton” in the Catholic Church in the USA.

    And – to repeat – “The Good News Bible” belongs to that class of Bible versions more aptly classified as ‘paraphrases’ rather than actual strict ‘translation’.

    And – to repeat – some versions of the Bible are indeed published with a special section for “The Apocrypha”, included in a clearly-marked section separate from the actual canonical Books that are accepted by both Roman Catholics and Protestants.

    • Publion says:

      Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 28th at 1025PM:

      As to the second question:

      While attempting to mimic competent style, ‘Dan’ fails to provide competent substance: what is the referent for that “it’s” (in “If as you say it’s not acceptable …”)? Is he referring here to The Apocrypha (and ‘Dan’s 2-Esdras quotations)? Or to the Bible generally?

      And we see yet again that ‘Dan’ has constructed for his self-serving cartoon universe a fantasized group called “true Christians” who apparently are not associated with any Catholic or Protestant polity but are instead – in their “thousands” or their “millions”, take your pick – followers of the ‘Dan’-verse Method of simply picking and choosing what you like and then claiming that what you ‘see’ is the only “true” vision of the text.

      And again – in that “those horrible sins” bit – we see the fingerprints of ‘Dan’s basic self-serving scam: as long as he hasn’t (and that’s a presumption) committed any of “those horrible sins” of child sex-abuse and idolatry, then he’s pretty much beyond reproach or doubt and would like everyone to focus on them Kathliks who do participate in “those horrible sins” because ‘Dan’ is God’s very speshull and “forgiven” Deputy Dawg. 

    • Publion says:

      Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 28th at 1025PM:

      As to the third question:

      When I say Protestants I refer to any of the major polities that consider themselves to be historically and traditionally and doctrinally Reformation-based. It is a matter of question whether any individual Bible-reader who simply sets up shop for him/herself while adhering to no major Protestant polity is to be classified as a Protestant or is rather to be considered one of that number of individuals (some with followers) who are more like independent (or perhaps rogue) Bible entrepreneurs who heap up Bible ‘knowledge’ merely according to their own preferences, excitements, desires, illusions or delusions.

      As for the further stab at mimicry concerning “cross-referencing different versions”, we are immediately into the deep and dense thicket of problems associated with actual translations, further intensified by the abyssal problems associated with preferential ‘paraphrasing’ efforts (such as, for example, The Good News Bible). 

    • Publion says:

      Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 28th at 1025PM:

      Nor, while we’re on the subject, does such “cross-referencing” merely and inevitably produce “a better understanding”.

      Some contradictions are historically insoluble, such as Matthew saying (2:1) that Jesus was born during the reign of Herod the Great while Luke (2:1-2) says that Jesus was born during the governorship of Quirinius, who became governor after Herod’s death and whose putative first census took place almost 10 years after Herod’s death; nor – contra Luke – is there any historical evidence of any world-wide census ordered during the reign of Augustus, for which, in any case, there would be no rational requirement for persons to have to register in their ancestral towns rather than their present places of residence.

      Thus when otherwise uninformed persons wade into the Biblical text secure in their presumptions that a) the Bible text is utterly clear and to be taken literally at all points and that b) they are thus easily equipped to fully and accurately fathom the text … then you see the problem.

      And when they then further insist that they have a speshull line of enlightenment directly from God and when they then further insist on top of that that one must accept their stuff or be guilty of “mocking God” … then you see the problem even more.

    • Publion says:

      On then to ‘Dan’s of the 29th at 1238PM:

      Here – again looking to mimic competence – ‘Dan’ doth prudently beg to “also point out the obvious fact that” … and what might this “obvious fact” be?

      Here ‘Dan’ tries to pass off as an “obvious fact” what is actually precisely the problem-point yet to be demonstrated, i.e. that “both catholic and protestant theologists [sic] … weren’t terribly skilled” when they missed or refused to accept as canonical the stuff in “Esdras”.

      This – marvelously – dovetails with ‘Dan’s own delusional scamming: anyone who doesn’t buy his stuff is ‘obviously’ not spiritually or theologically competent (and – but of course – mocks God by questioning ‘Dan’s stuff).

      One might as easily say that both Catholic and Protestant theologians were quite acute and accurate in denying canonicity to the latter two Esdras texts.

      But ‘Dan’ has a cunning method to his madness here: if the latter two Esdras texts are “full of brilliant wisdom” and contain “some of the greatest wisdom and knowledge of the Lord” / and yet aren’t accepted as canonical by “manmade religions” / then ‘Dan’s stuff too is sorta the very same thing.

      That’s what a nice tight delusional system and a stunning lack of Biblical chops will get you. 

    • Publion says:

      On then to ‘Dan’s of the 28th at 1046PM:

      Having run out of ways to repeat his preferred narrative excuses for himself (and apparently not sure whether the old ‘say nothing good at all’ saw came from ‘Dan’s “father” or God the Father) ‘Dan will – had you been waittinggggggggg forrrrrrrrrrr ittttttttttttttttt? – pass along a “prophecy” that one of his friends just came up with (or pulled off a Divine Fax Machine).

      The “prophecy” starts off well enough: “We all have to deal with life”. I would advise ‘Dan’ to take its advice and start dealing with life and not indenture himself to the unreality of his cartoon-universe.

      Oh, and he doesn’t like being “demeaned”. Well, when you set up claiming to be God’s speshull Deputy Dawg and then demonstrate vividly and at great length that you have neither a) the chops that would expectably flow from a Divine source nor b) the personal characteristics that would expectably flow from being immersed in so speshull and close a relationship with the Divine … then you have demeaned yourself. 

    • Publion says:

      And after having sat through ‘Dan’s Wig-laden performance, we are then given no respite as JR – that other veteran vaudeville hoofer – returns to the boards (the 29th at 1057PM).

      For this performance JR has chosen the Wig of being one of the “grownups”. This should be entertaining, if nothing else, whether one is or isn’t one of the “diests” (sic).

      But all we get is JR’s signature fallback conceit: that it’s all a Church-run conspiracy. Regular readers will recall how he has had to expand his “conspiracy” theory beyond all shape in order to explain-away so many elements of the Catholic Abuse Matter. 

    • Publion says:

      Continuing with my comment on JR’s of the 29th at 1057PM:

      In this performance, JR now declares that both I and ‘Dan’ “are plants bigger than this jungle”. It is not – quotha – mere “unsullied chance” that I and ‘Dan’ are here.

      And for what purpose might both I and ‘Dan’ been ‘planted’ here? Easy-peezy and clear as a bell: we have been ‘planted’ here in order to “talk so no one else can”. In other words, JR is trying to run the old ‘can’t get a word in’ bit.

      So – yet again: it’s a written site, not a verbal conversation. Anyone can put up material.

      But regular readers will recall what JR did put up and how it all came back to bite him. His problem is his material, not the fact that he can’t get his material into the mix here.

      But – so much like ‘Dan’ – JR wants to see himself and to be seen as – had you been waitttinggg forrr it? – the ‘victim’ here: it’s not his own words that are the problem and it’s not his fault; it’s rather that there is a conspiracy to keep him from putting his stuff up. 

    • Publion says:

      Continuing with my comment on JR’s of the 29th at 1057PM:

      And – for that added oomph – JR poses himself in this performance as a ‘grownup’, although a ‘grownup’ who apparently thinks that adolescent scatology is a hallmark of that status.

      We are then further treated to a discourse on “The Bible” and so on that is ripe in its adolescent silliness and pretend-tough-guy posturing.

      And to top it all off, JR doth instruct that we “Grow up!”.

      To become like JR? I think not. 

    • Dan says:

      And while your at it, you may as well come to terms with more of your delusions. YOU ARE A MOCKER AND SCOFFER OF GOD, HIS HOLY SPIRIT, HIS SON and HIS CHOSEN ONES. I used capital letters because I believe you have a serious problem recognizing your problems, possibly because of ignorance or plain stupidity.   servant of a Vengeful God of Wrath

  56. Dan says:

    After denying Romans 1:18-32 totally depicts "the Catholic Church", with its idolatry that leads to it's homosexual pedophilia and perversions, Paul explains what will come of the wicked and disobedient in Romans 2:5-13.

    "By your stubbornness and impenitent heart, you are storing up wrath for yourself for the day of wrath and revelation of the just judgment of God, who will repay everyone according to their works: eternal life to those who seek glory, honor, and immortality through perseverance in good works, but wrath and fury to those who selfishly disobey the truth and obey wickedness. Yes, affliction and distress will come upon every human being who does evil, Jew first and then Greek. But there will be glory, honor, and peace for everyone who does good, Jew first and then Greek. There is no partiality with God. All who sin outside the law will also perish without reference to it, and all who sin under the law will be judged in accordance with it. For it is not those who hear the law who are just in the sight of God; rather, those who observe the law will be justified."

    Now publiar, attempt to twist and manipulate this, with claims that it doesn't apply to "the Church" of hypocrites, or better yet that the Book of Romans doesn't belong to the canon. Despicable catholic liars, among the leaders of the catholic church, are leading souls right into the clutches of Satan, with their lies, deceit and blindfolding of their followers. Don't allow these hypocrites to deceive you at the cost of your soul. Read the Bible for yourself. They are false prophets and teachers from a more than false belief system, greedy, wicked, idolators, pedophiles and perverts, cowards and liars. "Be ye not deceived"  servant of the Lord

  57. Publion says:

    On the 30th at 108AM ‘Dan’ tries to run a variation of the now-familiar ‘conspiracy’ excuse: are Catholics on this site not “responding” to my “ignorance” and “longwinded garbage” and “lies” about him merely because I am “one of [their] own”?

    To have even a distantly-probable pretext for such an insinuation, one has to presume that my material is patently “ignorance”, especially about things Catholic such that Catholics would feel moved to object.

    And also to presume that my assessments of ‘Dan’s material (and thus of ‘Dan’, since with ‘Dan’ it’s love-me-love-my-dog and disagree-with-me-and-you-mock-God) are – if not demonstrable “lies” – then patently incredible.

  58. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s o the 30th at 108AM:

    But if there is no Catholic commenting here that stands up for ‘Dan’s stuff, then perhaps it is more rational not to presume or insinuate a conspiracy or old-school-tie dynamic, but rather instead to consider the possibility that none of my assessments or Catholic doctrinal and Scriptural material are seen to be incredible or off-base.

    But this, of course, would mean that ‘Dan’s own efforts to spin himself as the truthy victim and ‘Dan’s own stuff about Catholicism and the Church and Scripture are not convincing to readers.

    But if he were to consider this possibility, then his head would explode.

    • Dan says:

      More "ignorance".

    • Dan says:

      Your lies, deceptions, catholic idolatry and ignorance and garbage would be acceptable to any brainwashed catholic, but unacceptable to any Christian, and that is where your problems lie. Literally!  servant of the Truth

  59. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 30th at 124AM:

    Here ‘Dan’ demonstrates (unwittingly, of course) the switcheroo without which none of his stuff really makes sense: from the outset he presumes that he is “telling you the truth”. Once that rabbit hole has been jumped into, then it’s downhill all the way.

    Thus the rest of his bit here, which rests on the foundation of that switcheroo, simply dissolves in the air.

    And for that extra added benny to himself, ‘Dan’ also lards on a victim bit: he’s been ‘attacked’ by “circling vultures”. So long as he continues to masquerade his self-serving delusions as “truth”, then he’s going to be opposed by anyone who points that out.

    • Dan says:

      I'm not a "victim" treated as badly as the little innocent children that the creeps of your cult raped, but I truly am a "victim", falsely accused by the liars of your Kathlik Kult, including yourself. I suffered from their many lies with false imprisonment and mental evaluations that were uncalled for, seeing they were based on lies. It's a blast being thrown in the tank with drunk catholics and having to stand for 4-8 hours because of hereditary arthritis and all they offer is a cement bench. The staff at the mental wards treat you like garbage, until I was able to see a doctor and be released. The food was so horrible that I wouldn't even want a lying pig like yourself to eat. Do you think I would have told you of these incidents if they weren't false accusations from liars of your cult? Then you really are stupid. Why don't you stop with your lies and slander, Hypocrite. You're one disgusting example of a catholic, unless being included with the other catholic creeps of your cult, and nothing near anything Christian.

  60. Publion says:

    Continuing with ‘Dan’s of the 3-th at 124AM:

    But wait. There’s more. He then lards on a compliment to himself: he clearly must “love people quite a bit” to “put up with the slew of lies …” and so on. But a) this presumes that he is bethumped by a “slew of lies” and that presumption is demonstrably dubious in the extreme.

    And b) there is a perfectly plausible and far more probable explanation for what he’s doing: that through his indenture to his delusion and his insistence on getting into everyone’s face in the service of that delusion he has put himself in the sufficiently satisfying situation of i) indulging his antisocial assaultive tendencies while ii) considering himself to be merely a victim and the more he is doubted and questioned the more he a heroic, truthy, and even a ‘loving’ victim.

    And the compliment leads to a further self-serving victim-y riff: is anyone under the impression that doth “enjoy this punishment?”.

    He does “enjoy this punishment”. It’s this or else he has to genuinely face himself in the bathroom mirror. And then his head would explode.

    • Dan says:

      Publiar adding more of his ignorance and stupidity to the lies and accusations of my mental state. It gives me joy to know that you're just piling on more coals for your destruction. Repent, you lying fool.

  61. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 30th at 457PM:

    Having run through his pile of 3x5s, he now repeats one that he tried to run here not long ago: Romans 1:18-32.

    But his mind isn’t really up to it, since his opening paragraph actually says here that Paul denied and did n-o-t depict the Church as such; the clause governed by that “denying” has “Paul” as its subject.

    And in any case, both of ‘Dan’s pericopes here require – had you been waittttingggg forrrr ittttt? – the presumption that these very human foibles apply solely and uniquely to the Church, which clearly they do not.

    Then ‘Dan’ sets to work twisting and manipulating. I claim that Paul’s lists here do not apply solely and uniquely to the Church (which ‘Dan’ further manipulates by referring to it as “’the Church’ of hypocrites”); that the failings Paul lists can and do apply to any human organization and individuals. Thus that if this is Paul in ‘prophetic’ mode, it is that ‘prophetic’ mode that demonstrates Paul’s insight into human nature, not his knowledge of the future.

    • Dan says:

      Don't act so stupid, after you're denying Romans 1:18-32 depicts the hypocrites of the catholic church, and it most assuredly does, especially your hierarchy being convicted homosexual pedophiles and pervs.

      And once again, they do apply to any sexually perverse humans, so they would most definitely apply to the pedophile and perverted creeps of your cult. Are you that dense that I must repeat this and other things several times and yet you're still too ignorant and stupid to comprehend it.

      Paul's 'prophetic' insight would be past, present and most definitely future, if he described what becomes of the pagan idolators of the creepy catholic cult and how that would lead them to such disgusting homosexually deviant crimes against innocence, and your hierarchy fits the bill perfectly 2000 years later. Quit trying to weasel and manipulate from the truth. servant

  62. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 30th at 457PM:

    And ‘Dan’ then further twists and manipulates by then claiming or proposing that I do not consider the Letter to the Romans to be canonical. Which is something I have never said and which actually applies to ‘Dan’s reliance on the non-canonical ‘2 Esdras’ material.

    But on that basis of that latter bit of twisty deceit, ‘Dan’ can then riff on about “despicable catholic liars” and so on and on.

    It is better to say “Be ye not deceived” as to what ‘Dan’s switcheroo scams try to do. His deceitful delusions will only lead one to the swamps of the ‘Dan’-verse, which is a hell all on its own.

    • Dan says:

      I'm sure in no time you'll be able to know everything about hell through your own experience. Don't forget to bring plenty of your poppin' corn.

  63. Dan says:

    Good News Bible (GNB) w/ Apocrypha including 1 & 2 Esdras a) Correction - Imprimatur: John Francis Whealon, Archbishop of Hartford May 15, 1978  b) Imprimatur: Most Reverend Archbishop William H. Keeler, President, National Conference of Catholic Bishops March 10, 1993 – As if the publiar hasn't made enough excuses as to the Book of Esdras not being part of the canon and GNB only a paraphrase, as if that makes it void of representing God's Word or His Spiritual Wisdom. Let's sit back and enjoy the Cartoon Time Caramel Corn Snakes while he sucks on his Kathlik Kult Kool-Aid and listen as he manipulates and weasels his way out of this one. God's Word is just what it is and don't let these deceivers of your catholic cult twist and think they can change their meanings. There's nothing wrong with the teachings in the Good News Bible and in fact they can be quite informative in discerning good from evil. Snobby, Holier Than Thou phonies think they can claim they're not authorized because they prefer to keep you from knowing the truth. Just as publiar thinks that if he can accuse me of not knowing the Bible and of mental illness (i.e. FDS), then no catholics will listen to my teaching of the Lord's Word. I've been reading and studying the Bible for forty years, without the distractions of philosophy or so-called knowledge of ignorant hypocrites. Read the Lord's Word and learn His truths in order to know the truth which will set you free from the ignorant.  servant w/chops

     

  64. ej says:

    dan, how do you explain the abuse committed by Protestant pastors?  Are you so blinded by your hatred of the Catholic Church that you refuse to admit that sexual abuse is also committed by ministers, rabbis and public school teachers?  Interestingly, it's the Catholic Church that is singled out however for punishment.  The rest of abusers pretty much get a free pass.  I suppose it is because the RCC  is the single voice still proclaiming moral truths that the rest of the world  does not want to hear these days so it has to be smeared and shut down.

    • Dan says:

      What's wrong with you catholics? I am against pedophilia or child abuse against innocent children no matter who's to blame, but it's especially heinous when practiced by the self-righteous religious hypocrites of any belief system claiming to worship God and living by His standards. It's not those who are "proclaiming moral truths" that are the righteous in the eyes of the Lord, but those who live by those "moral truths". You may not know my history with your Holier Than Thou Cult, but your hierarchy comprised the majority of false accusers having me imprisoned or sent for mental evaluations, based totally on lies. I actually believe they did that so they could point out to their dumb sheep that there goes the monster, so their brainwashed followers wouldn't look at their own pedophilia, perversions and wickedness. Creeps and lying hypocrites. Maybe you think lying isn't so bad, but God lists lies and liars as those worthy of Hell's Fire. Rev. 21:8 and Rev. 22:15. Just so happens that your cult is guilty for all the sins listed in those verses. Try reading the Bible before claiming my hatred of your pagan cult is unjustified.  servant of the Just God and His Son

      P.S. Your rcc has "smeared" it's own reputation and only has itself to blame. Time to shut it down. And it's Oh so genuine that your creeps ask for forgiveness and want us to look away, while they would like everyone else to receive "punishment". If that ain't hypocrisy at it's finest.

  65. Dan says:

    Duh! It's called sarcasm, better known as you attempt to use it as outright lying. I'm saying what manipulations and excuses will you come up with next? That Romans isn't part of the canon or that Romans 1&2 doesn't apply to "the church", as you have already attempted to claim. Must you always carry on as a disingenuous hypocrite? Your cover is blown. servant

  66. Jim Robertson says:

    "Dear" Stupid P, We know you "think not" that's the problem.

    You and Dan both are "servants" of your imaginary friend: the sky demon that you worship. I say demon because according to it's magic book "he" supposedly drowned the whole of humanity and saved an incestuous  family in an over populated ark. Such a loving god for us to adore. innocent babies drowned because they did not love a god enough they did not know existed. Anyone who thinks such a god a) exists and b, is worth worshiping, are very damaged people indeed. It's like worshiping the biggest mass murderer of them all.

    No one asked you to be like me (as if you had the balls to be.)

    Yes anyone can put up anything here but why would they? You two whores hog the discussion between you. No one can get a word in. You two take up all the room. Why? To re-hash the Reformation ? Catholicism vs. Protestantism has what to do with clerical sex abuse? Nothing, is the answer.

    So why so much "talk" about what is so irrelevant to the subject at hand if not to obfuscate? You create a maze of words and thought that hides not clarifies. Why would you do that time after time; day after day, year in and year out if not to fool people or at the very least to distract people?

     

     

    • ej says:

       "he" supposedly drowned the whole of humanity and saved an incestuous  family in an over populated ark. Such a loving god for us to adore. innocent babies drowned because they did not love a god enough they did not know existed. "

      Jim,

      If you bothered to read all of the Old Testament, you would find that God offered plenty of opportunities for repentance.  The people stubbornly clung to their evil behavior.  

      "…the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away….blessed be the Lord"

    • Dan says:

      Oh! Isn't that precious. The queen of queens calling us "whores". In two years I've spoken more against "clerical sex abuse" than you ever dreamed to. What's your problem? I know queers like to be the center of attention. No one is stopping you from speaking your peace. The problem with "the Church" is so much deeper than just their perversions and pedophilia. I've never come against your cause of seeking settlements for victims who deserved it. I want the cult to stop their deceptions and deceit and clean up their act, or face the righteous punishment that they will truly deserve. Why do you think so many are attacking me? They can't stand that I speak the truth against their hypocrisy. I'd like all to come to know the true God, and you could use Him as much as anyone. It's plain stupid to think God is this cruel Creator who goes around killing innocent children. Evilness from Hell was responsible for their deaths. You think God would hold it against little children who had no chance to decide between right or wrong? What god do you serve, the homosexual one or the trash-mouthed one. Publiar is bad enough with his mocking, but your cursing God is in no way going to benefit you or your cause. I'll leave you to your work and would appreciate you leaving me to mine.

  67. Publion says:

    There was a lot of material placed on the table in my comments of the 30th and 31st.

    From ‘Dan’ we get (the 30th at 1022PM, 1029PM, and 1139PM) nothing but strings of I’m Not/You Are epithets, their ‘content’ supposedly buttressed by scream-caps.

    But – doncha see? – ‘Dan’ only screams here to – had you been waitttingggg forrrr ittttt? – emphasize how “serious a problem” I have because – once again with the I’m Not/You Are scam – I avoid and evade “recognizing [my] problems, possibly because of ignorance or plain stupidity” (see his comment of the 30th at 1029PM).

    Oh, and this time ‘Dan’s self-printed business card styles him as “servant of a Vengeful God of Wrath”. But not a God, apparently, up to the task of dealing with the material presently on the table.

    • Dan says:

      God or myself would never be required or demanded to answer to a compulsive liar, no matter how important he thinks his worthless material is. That hasn't yet entered your exploded head?

  68. Publion says:

    It’s been over a month and no more ‘news’ about the Cardinal Pell case. The Aussie police and prosecutors were supposed to have turned over a list of charges (if not also whatever evidence supports them) as early as a week after Cardinal Pell’s court appearance back in the last week of July.

    On the 17th of August, however, that Aussie Royal Commission issued its final Criminal Justice Report, with 85 Recommendations it would like to see implemented throughout the land.

    The full text is available via the Web; I include here only the link to an initial official press release

    https://childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/media-centre/media-releases/2017-08/report-on-criminal-justice-released

    Readers so inclined can view the text of the entire Report from that same site.

    • Publion says:

      The Report reflects the Royal Commission’s (hereinafter: “RC”) mandate to examine “institutional” abuse.

      One might see in this a veiled attempt to evade the hardly irrational suspicion that the RC was basically going after the Church. And, indeed, the UK’s Guardian has an article reporting that the RC took the Royal Australian Navy and Army to task for abusive (physical and sexual) hazing practices … in the 1960s and 1970s, for which preventive measures instituted in the 1970s and 1980s were, the RC feels, insufficient.

      https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/22/navy-staff-tolerated-widespread-child-sexual-abuse-of-recruits-royal-commission-says

      It is noteworthy that the article reports no instance or official intention of bringing any charges or prosecuting any cases arising against any accused Aussie military personnel of that era for these “historical” abuses.  

    • Publion says:

      The Report is concerned, says the official release, “to provide a fairer response to victims of institutional child sexual abuse”. And thus from the get-go we are off to the races with that granddaddy of all Victimist switcheroos: the existence of genuine victims is presumed before any investigating is begun.

      As with laying in an aircraft’s or ship’s course for a long journey into a navigation computer, even the smallest decimal point of error will, over the course of the journey, be amplified into a wide cone of error; and the longer the journey, the wider the cone of error.

      Worse, once you have presumed – even if only in a general and abstract way – the existence of genuine victims, then it is almost inevitable that any specific allegant will insist on being granted that same presumption in a particular case or allegation. And if any specific one is granted that presumption, then all will demand it. As has happened.

    • Publion says:

      The RC declares itself moved and concerned by the fact that “conviction rates” in abuse cases “are lower compared to other crimes”.

      How, then, to raise (not to say ‘improve’) the conviction rates? We shall soon see when we get to its 85 Recommendations which, the RC burbles, are “likely to improve responses to child sexual abuse in all contexts”, i.e. in non-institutional criminal (and perhaps also civil-litigation) allegations.

      If you raise the conviction rates – doncha see? – then you will “improve” the “responses” to the allegations. 

    • Publion says:

      How then to pull this off?

      There’s a bit of a problem, says the RC CEO, Mr. Philip Reed: “Child sexual abuse cases are often ‘word against word’ cases with no eyewitnesses and no medical or scientific evidence”.  And, of course, he continues, “complainants often take years to disclose their abuse”.

      His use of words here requires some parsing to follow his tracks: He nicely uses the term “complainants” rather than the presumptive ‘victims’, but then he quickly recovers by using the verb “disclose” rather than, say, the verb ‘complain’ – which verb would match his characterization of “complainants”. And that “disclose” contains the very presumption that the (alleged) abuse actually took place (and if you’ve presumed the existence of the crime, then you must presume the existence of a perpetrator who committed the presumed crime – that’s how it goes in this sort of thing).

      But his general point is well-taken: what do you do when you have cases where there is no evidence?

    • Publion says:

      The solution (if you are not going to dismiss the case for lack of actual evidence) would have to be along the lines of either a) reducing the role of evidence or b) re-defining the entire concept of ‘evidence’ so as to make it easier to raise the conviction rate. Or c) both.

      And the Recommendations set about doing just that.

      The RC recommends that “sentencing standards” in these “historical” cases (i.e. the allegations stem from decades ago) be those in effect (in the Victimist-soaked era of) today, rather than the sentencing standards that were in effect at the time the abuse was (allegedly) committed.

      Thus, of course, this Recommendation seeks to ensure that whatever “evidence” remains be viewed under the rubric of the Victimist presumptions i) that the abuse was indeed committed and ii) that the accused– since there has to be a presumptive perpetrator – most likely did it (or at least something close to it). 

    • Publion says:

      And it also slyly assumes that such “sentencing standards” also hew to the Victimist-deranged concept of “evidence” that is now regnant today: one recalls the old ‘Believe the children!’ mantra of the McMartin Pre-School Day-Care Satanic Ritual Child Abuse cases, and the assorted other bits of Victimist  dogma, i.e. to not-believe the ‘victim’ is to ‘re-victimize’ the ‘victim; to insist on rational evidence is to patriarchally oppress the ‘victim’ (this bit is radical feminism’s contribution); feelings and stories of one’s ‘personal truth’ are even more important than any rationally-demonstrable truth (ditto); ‘repressed memories’ and ‘recovered memories’ are photograph-level evidence supporting the claim and the story; abusers always lie and ‘victims’ never do; and in any case, to not-find against an accused will have a ‘chilling effect’ on future ‘victim reports’ and will ‘send the wrong message’ to ‘victims’ and abusers alike.  And so on.

    • Publion says:

      This “sentencing standard” Recommendation then adroitly tacks in such a way as to avoid hitting the rocks of Western law’s Ex Post Facto principle: while the accused is to be judged on “evidence” as that term is known today (which greatly improves the chance of a conviction and thus upping the “conviction rates”) yet the maximum sentence applicable can be no greater than whatever the maximum sentence was back in the “historical” era when the alleged abuse took place.

      Thus you greatly improve the “conviction rates” while you don’t run afoul of the Ex Post Facto principle by retroactively imposing a greater sentence than the one in effect at the time of commission. Neato.

    • Publion says:

      Readers so inclined can continue their examination of either the official press release or the text of the Report itself.

      But I also point out that one of the Recommendations mentioned even in the press release (under the heading “Failure to report and the religious confessional”) is that priests be required to report any confessions of child-abuse made by penitents during the Sacrament of Penance.

      I’m not sure even the Third Reich went that far (although I’m sure Hitler, Goebbels, Himmler and Goring would dearly have wished to). The Soviets, of course, didn’t even bother themselves with such problems since they knew they were going to abolish religion anyway. 

    • Publion says:

      Observing (from a great distance, admittedly) the RC in the context of current Australian politics, it seems that the current regime (in the most neutral sense of the term) enjoys only a razor-thin margin of political support and greatly needs to attract further political support.

      Jumping on the abuse bandwagon in order to steer it toward their own purposes might appear to them to be the very thing necessary to improve their position, garnering the support and approbation of many interests.

      Given that civil-litigation in Australia is not the Wild-West show it is in the U.S. where the torties can jump in and create massive lawsuits and garner sky’s-the-limit amounts of money, often without trial, I don’t see a good old-fashioned Stampede along American lines taking place in Australia any time soon.

      But the abuse bandwagon is currently one of the best vehicles on offer for the political types, and the Church one of the most acceptable targets. Thus Cardinal Pell becomes so attractive a target, especially to the Victoria police (who, if one reads the Report’s full text, come in for the lion’s share of ‘suggestions’ from the RC).

      Whether the Victoria police and prosecutors will be able to redeem themselves in the eyes of the RC by bagging so prestigious a trophy remains to be seen. 

    • Dan says:

      Why would Cardinal Pell be considered "so prestigious a trophy" when he's only just another perverted pedophile creep from your cult of pedophiles and perverts? His title shouldn't grant him any more prestige than any other low-life from your cult.  servant of the Just God, hoping to see justice served

      P.S. Did so enjoy your longwinded discussion of nothingness on the subject.

  69. Jim Robertson says:

    What an idiot you are. Your church hid pedophiles and allowed them to harm again and you're the victim. You are THE most IMMORAL piles of dung on the planet in your category.

  70. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 31st at 748PM:

    Here ‘Dan’ will engage in a familiar bit of distraction: to evade his rather obvious ploy for ‘victim’-status he quickly tries to move the subject to – had you been waitttingggg forrrr itttttt? – all “the little innocent children” and so on.

    But having played the “children” card, he feels confident that he can again go back to his ploy: he really is a victim – doncha see? – of being “falsely accused” and so on. Readers may judge his claim as they will.

    And he even feels so good about the ploy (buttressed by the card) that he will lard on more bits about his trials, tribulations and misadventures: “false imprisonment” and “mental evaluations that were uncalled for” … and readers can really judge that latter bit as they will.

  71. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 31st at 748PM:

    He was also “thrown in the tank with drunk cathoilcs” (apparently in the Bay Area they only lock up drunk Catholics or else only Catholics get drunk – although I would have imagined that the Bay Area decriminalized public-drunkenness quite a few decades ago). And he had “hereditary arthritis” and had to sit on a “cement bench” because that’s all “they offer” … Jonah was thrown overboard to sleep with da fishes and ‘Dan’ wails about jails not offering a more comfy place to sit down. Such a prophet.

    And “garbage”  – one of his favorite epitheticals – appears again, although this time ‘Dan’ claims not that he had to read “garbage” but that he was “treated like garbage” by mental health staff. One would imagine that the Bay Area of all places would have robust mental health services. But then, maybe robust mental assessment is not what ‘Dan’ really wants or likes.

    • Dan says:

      Allow me to educate you. Jonah was sent to "sleep with da fishes" because he refused to obey the Lord when asked to be sent to warn the evil and the sinners of Nineveh.

      I was sent by the Lord my God to warn the wicked and the sinners of "the church" and other religions to change their ways, before the punishment of God rained down upon them. I obeyed and did the work the Lord asked of me, but the stubborn, deceitful, deviant, perverted, hypocritical liars of the catholic church have refused to listen, and instead have slandered and falsely accused His servant and caused him to suffer unjust punishments.

      This has fulfilled what Jesus predicted the righteous would suffer at the hands of the wicked in Matthew 5:10-12

      "Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me. Rejoice and celebrate, because great is your reward in heaven; for in the same way they persecuted the prophets before you." Matthew 5:10-12

      It must give you great solace, publiar, to know that your added lies and slander are what confirm my being a prophet chosen and sent by the Lord. For all the catholic vultures that have attacked me, be sure that my message was to help you and not destroy you and to hopefully free you from the lies and deception of your wicked cult.

      Please consider not to respond to this post, so I will have no reason to have to try to help any of you from here on out. Jim, the floor is all yours and you can return to getting all the attention from this deceiving cult, to your hearts desire. You won't have to be bothered anymore in your conscience by the Biblical quotes that so annoy your soul. You're on your own and will receive no assistance from the Lord God in fighting your worthless cause against this viciously cruel, wicked pagan cult of unremorseful pedophiles and lying perverts. servant of the Lord and Only God, and everything that is Right and True

       

  72. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 31st at 748PM:

    And then he tries to somehow turn these story-bits into ‘evidence’: do we think he would go to the trouble of telling all of this if the grounds for his tribulations “weren’t false accusations from the liars of your cult?”.

    Yes, I think he would. Precisely because the grounds were not false and he needs to come up with some excuse not only to convince us but even more to help him evade the reality of what he did to get himself incarcerated and examined (six times).

    And he tops off the whole performance here with more epithetical riffing.

  73. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 31st at 815PM:

    Here ‘Dan’ merely insists yet again that (as far as he can see) Romans 1:18-32 “most assuredly”  “depicts the hypocrites of the catholic church”.

    He then inverts the logical process: since Paul’s comments “do apply to any sexually perverse humans” then “they would most definitely apply to” the Church and so on. But if that is so, i.e. that Paul has said something that would “apply to any sexually perverse humans”, then it wouldn’t really be “prophecy” in the magical ‘Dan’/fundie sense in the first place.

    And Paul would merely be making a comment about “any sexually perverse humans” and wouldn’t be specifically going after the Church.

    Although, as I pointed out when this pericope was first put up some threads back, Paul here is trying to demonstrate to the Christian community in Rome that pagans, having rejected the Gospel, thereby wind up giving themselves over to all manner of aimless pleasures because only the Gospel can provide the structure and matrix that enables humans to work against such aimless pleasuring.

  74. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 31st at 815PM:

    But what we are seeing here is simply the core operating code of ‘Dan’s entire delusional system: only “sexual perversion” is unforgivable; ‘Dan’ doesn’t do that sort of thing; Catholics who called the police on him are sunk in that sort of thing; so let’s not think about ‘Dan’s queasy and repellent problems and instead let’s all agree that he is heroic, truthy and prophetic for going after Catholicism, the Church and Catholics.

    Neato.

    But that requires a whole lot of presumptions ,‘the Church is perverse’ and ‘Catholicism is idolatrous’ being his two biggies. Readers may consider the accuracy and validity of these two presumptions as they will.

  75. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 31st at 715PM:

    ‘Dan’s problem here was that he had made a statement (about the “Archbishop of Wheaton”) that was patently not accurate.

    He apparently has actually gone back and more carefully read the relevant material and now issues a “Correction”. How nice.

    There is a Good News Bible for Catholics (which includes the Apocrypha) called ‘Today’s English Version, Second Edition’, sometimes abbreviated to TEV-2. Thus the texts of the Apocrypha as they appear in that edition are free of doctrinal error for Catholics, but still remain non-canonical and still remain – not to put too fine a point on it – apocryphal.

    For personal and private study, Catholics can use either the TEV-2 or any version of the Good News Bible given an Imprimatur by an Ordinary or episcopal conference.

  76. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 31st at 715PM:

    That being said, we are still thrown back to the abiding and abyssal problem with all the ‘Dan’-verse Scriptural material: while the text itself remains free of doctrinal error, the interpretations or applications of the text enjoy no such guarantee; the Imprimatur applies to the text, not to anybody’s particular interpretations or applications of the text.

    And with all of the ‘Dan’ Scriptural stuff, it is always the interpretation and application that ‘Dan’ comes up with (and insists must be accepted as God’s own interpretation) that is the problem and will necessarily remain the problem (since if ‘Dan’ had to give up his cartoonish interpretations and applications of the text then his whole show would collapse and his head would explode).

  77. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 31st at 715PM:

    And with that being said, it remains true that the Esdras material (as opposed to the material that appears in the Books of Ezra and Nehemiah) is not canonical. The Imprimatur does not raise the Apocrypha to canonicity or canonical status. Except in the deceptive and simplistic cartoon universe ‘Dan’ has created for himself.

    And it remains true that such ‘paraphrase’ or ‘dynamic translation’ versions are not advisable as the sole or primary Bible text for Catholics (or anyone seeking a solid comprehension). I quote from the Catholic Answers site, in its Bible Translations Guide: “The disadvantage of a dynamic translation is that there is a price to pay for readability. Dynamic translations … run a greater risk of reading the translators’ doctrinal views into the text because of the greater liberty in how to render it” (in order to make the text more easily readable).

    Thus ‘Dan’s silly attempt here to use the Imprimatur as a solves-all solution to all of his Biblical claims and assertions fails.

    And while there may be “nothing wrong with the teachings of the Good News Bible” that isn’t at all the point and never has been. The point is that there is everything wrong with ‘Dan’s attempts to interpret the text of the Good News Bible or any other version of the Bible. And he remains without “chops” on the subject.

  78. Jim Robertson says:

    ej, really? babies had to drown bevcause they didn't repent the sins they hadn't committed??

     

    • ej says:

      Jim, their parents were to blame.  They did not care about the fate of their children or they would have repented.  Unfortunately evil has consequences and the innocent are often the recipients.  But the innocent are with God.  The earth isn't our final home.

  79. Jim Robertson says:

    Danny u played yourself, "queen of queens"? "queer"? Wow! you don't get to use those words EVER!

    WHY? Because you haven't payed the price of  those words i.e. ostracism; abondonment by family; humilation, beatings, murders imprisonment, job loss  and or jail time for simply being who you are.

    Go away Dan.

    • Dan says:

      Where have you been Jim. I've suffered and paid the price for every one of those examples you mentioned, except murder obviously, just for being a Christian. Only difference was my suffering was undeserved, based on the lies of holy hypocrites, terribly different from suffering that comes from blatant disobedience against God and natural law. Sorry queenie.

  80. Jim Robertson says:

    And Dan I don't have a soul and neither has anyone here including you. How do I know this? Because you have zero proof that "souls' exist.

    The Bible quotes don't bother me anymore than a quote from Alice in Wonderland or Moby Dick would bother me. All fiction and fancy.

     

  81. Jim Robertson says:

    And dan, Reparations to people injured as children by sexual abuse is never a "worthless cause" Odd that you would say that. Very odd.

    • Dan says:

      I've had no problem with "Reparations to people injured as children by sexual abuse". Try not to put words in my mouth. I think your cause, whatever that may be is "worthless against this viciously cruel, wicked pagan cult of unremorseful pedophiles and lying perverts". Your message is so convoluted and confusing that it's hard to understand where your coming from, unless talking of your disdain and unbelief in the God of the Universe. That comes through loud and clear. I bet the people of Sodom and Gomorrah felt similar thoughts about the existence of God. I bet their horrible destruction was quick to change their minds.

  82. Jim Robertson says:

    Funny about "obeying the Lord". The Lord remains silent, lips that don't exist can not speak, yet you and yours are the ones saying "He" demands obedience. So if "He's" quiet then the only one's demanding the obedience are other mere mortals. Always.

    So we, if we obeyed, would only be obeying our fellow man. Since he (you) are the ones demanding all the obedience and you demand it in the name of something you've no proof even is.

    So you and your imaginary ruler of me and all the rest of the universe can take a hike back to fantsyland. Bye.

    • Dan says:

      If it's far away from you two, I will be happy to remain in God's "fantsyland". I thought queens and queers would like living in fancyland, problem is it will be no paradise when you arrive. BYE. 

  83. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 2nd at 1258AM:

    Here we get another nicely vivid demonstration of where a nice Fixed Delusional mentality will get you: ‘Dan’ pins his position on the fact that he is “against pedophilia or child abuse” and so on (the “against innocent children” here is merely a rhetorical addition larded on for that extra manipulative emotional oomph).

    So ‘Dan’ is “against pedophilia or child abuse”.  Fine and dandy. Who isn’t?

    But having tried to establish his position on that basis, he just cawn’t help himself and lets the other cat out of the bag: he’s also against these idolatrous Catholics who happen to be associated with “the self righteous religious hypocrites of any belief system claiming to worship God and live by His standards”.

    In the same way that ‘Dan’s pod-mate JR tried to lump all of his favorite bugbears into one big convenient package, ‘Dan’ also tries it: pedophilia and child abuse are combined with (take your pick) all religions or the Catholic religion (they’re the ones that called the police on him) into one big convenient ball, glued together by cartoon claims of idolatry and hypocrisy.

  84. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 2nd at 1258AM:

    Let’s face it: if you don’t do things the way ‘Dan’ wants them done, then you aren’t doing them the way God wants them done. And since you don’t have séances with the divine in your bathroom mirror, then you’d best do it ‘Dan’s way or it’s the hellway for you. God’ll getcha, and ‘Dan’ doth enjoy that prospect ever so much.

    And – again – I submit that readers may judge as they will whether any justification for ‘Dan’s needing “mental evaluation” can must only be “based totally on lies”.

  85. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 2nd at 229AM:

    Studiously evading the fact that compared to the grit of actual Biblical prophets ‘Dan’s whiney bleat about having to sit on a hard bench merely reveals him as a histrionic and self-dramatizing wussy, ‘Dan’ will use the Jonah reference to discourse upon why ‘Dan’ “was sent by the Lord” (or, actually, by whatever he thinks he sees in his bathroom mirror that tells him what he wants to hear).

    ‘Dan’ – doncha see? – is on a “mission from Gahd”, sorta like Jake and Elwood, although queasy-crazy instead of fun-crazy. But where Jake and Elwood are trying to save an orphanage, ‘Dan’ is just going to warm people away from “’the church’ and other religions”. His bathroom mirror tells him to do so.

    And are we to believe that only Catholics rejected his cartoons and all the other “religions” went along with his shtick? Or was it just that the Catholics called the police while none of the others did? This far down the rabbit hole, who knows?

  86. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 2nd at 229AM:

    Thus humanity is left with i) atheism or ii) paganism or iii) the ‘Dan’-made ‘religion’, consisting of whatever Bible version you pick and a bathroom mirror to inform your interpretative reading of it.

    But if one picks (iii) then it will have to be a ‘religion’ presided over by ‘Dan’. Otherwise he will take his little pail and shovel and make his piles and dig holes in his own sandbox. Which is pretty much what he’s already done.

  87. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 2nd at 229AM:

    Thus and yet again ‘Dan’ retreats to that grand-daddy of all proof-texts that provides endless hours and years of consolation to the sufficiently creative and deceptive unhinged, Matthew 5:10-12.

    The kicker – as I have said before when he has clutched his pearls and declaimed this trope – is that one has to be “persecuted because of righteousness” and one has to be ‘persecuted’ and so on “because of Me” (i.e. Christ).

    ‘Dan’ has been so often taken in and incarcerated by the police for his own behaviors – not for propagating Christ’s Gospel. ‘Dan’ propagates nothing but his own self-serving delusions and he is the “servant” only of his own purposes, which are those of sustaining his Fixed Delusional system.

    So the various messes ‘Dan’ has gotten himself into are not the result of preaching the Gospel but merely of throwing his delusional bits at people (including – let’s face it – innocent and helpless children in a schoolyard).

    And those messes are merely the ineluctable fulfillment of his acting-out his delusions against the public, the causes and consequences of which could have been ‘prophesied’ by any competent clinician.

  88. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 2nd at 229AM:

    Thus too then we see yet again the sly economy of the delusional system: the more its causes and consequences are exposed, the further proof merely that the offender is being ‘persecuted’ and ‘persecuted’ “because of righteousness”. This is a perpetual-motion machine, a conceptual Rube Goldberg dynamic and mechanism that can go on and on.

    Larded and frosted here with another deceptive bit: ‘Dan’ has only ever sought to “help you and not destroy you” (you “vultures”, actually), he pearl-clutchingly bleats with the Wig of Goody-Two-Shoes flapping on his head.

    But in this performance the substance of that mimicry cannot prevail over the actual hostility that floods through ‘Dan’ like a poisoned under-ground spring.

  89. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 2nd at 229AM:

    Which hostility, blended queasily with an unripe vengefulness is then immediately revealed when he declares in his final paragraph that he hopes he gets no response to this comment of his, so that he “will have no reason to try to help any of you from here on out”. A genuine prophet would display a genuine and Scripturally-informed maturity that is willing to suffer all in order to continue faithfully to declare God’s message.

    But ‘Dan’ – as I said – is no genuine prophet; he is merely the servant of his own delusions; the audience isn’t responding to his vaudeville shtick; so he will – so he implies – shut down his show. He’ll take his pail and shovel and go find someplace else to play on his own.

    He won’t do any such thing, of course. His delusions are such that he can’t simply sit home alone with them and enjoy them while privately communing with his bathroom mirror. He has to go out and toss his unripe vitriol everywhere he thinks he can get away with it; otherwise he wouldn’t seem to be a ‘prophet’.

  90. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 2nd at 229AM:

    And, lastly, we see once again the vital switcheroo so necessary to preserving his delusions:  he slyly slides in the bit that it is his “Biblical quotes” that “so annoy [my] soul”.

    Not in the least. As I have often said, it is not the Biblical quotations; it is his whackjob interpretations of those “Biblical quotes” that do “annoy” my mind.

    Like particularly aggressive horse-flies, it is ‘Dan’s interpretations that have to be swatted. Atheists and pagans merely ignore the Bible; ‘Dan’ abuses the Bible – and claims that his abuse must be taken as God’s will while he’s doing it.

    • Dan says:

      Sorry publiar, I have absolutely no desire to answer to your insistent mocking, lying, ignorance, stupidity and nonsense. Anyone who thinks those are desirable catholic qualities, needs to "Wake up sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you." Eph 5:14

    • Dan says:

      "Jim, the floor is all yours and you can return to getting all the attention from this deceiving cult, to your heart's desire. You won't have to be bothered anymore in your conscience by the Biblical quotes that so annoy your soul."

      Reading comprehension giving you a problem again, peewee? This statement was clear as day, proposed to Jim. Even Jim understood it was directed to him. For being such a man of supposed knowledge, you shur r dum.  servant

      P.S. I do understand how you made this mistake, seeing how "Biblical quotes [sure] annoy your soul". Probably not as much as you annoy God and His servants.

  91. Dan says:

    ej says:

    "If you bothered to read all of the Old Testament, you would find that God offered plenty of opportunities for repentance. The people stubbornly clung to their evil behavior."

    "…the Lord giveth and the Lord taketh away….blessed be the Lord"

    If only all catholics could understand how well ej's statement applies to your wicked cult.

    • ej says:

      Dan, I am a Catholic.  I belong to the Church that Christ, not some mere mortal, founded. That it is filled with sinners does not make it an evil cult.  Despite the grievous sins of its clegy and laity, it is still standing after 2000 years and its teachings have not changed, even thought there are some in high places of the Church that are attempting to change them.  But Jesus said that "the gates of Hell will not prevail against it…"  

      While there are people within the Church that have committed grave evils there are also people within the Church who have embraced the call to holiness that Christ extends to everyone.  It is ridiculous to paint and condemn the Church with the broad brush that you do.  One doesn't have to look far to find hypocrites in any church or faith. Take care that you do not harm your soul in harboring such extreme hatred for the Catholic Church.  

       

  92. Dan says:

    Jim, Jim, Jim, Judging from how eloquently spoken you tend to be, one could understand why you would consider yourself the poster child as the "moral authority". What makes me laugh hysterically is how atheists or heathens think they can totally berate or mock their Creator and despise His written Word, and yet they'll quote His Word in order to judge one of His true Christians. Thankfully neither you or publyin' would ever qualify to judge anyones moral decency or status with the Almighty, unless through some miracle of repentance your sinful lives turned a complete 180 degrees. Turning the other cheek, does not mean that Christians can't stand up for themselves and fight against pure wickedness and filth, especially when directed towards their Father in Heaven, His Son their Savior or their beliefs. I am not your judge, but we all shall surely stand before the Almighty and be judged for every careless word to come from our lips.   servant to the One and Only God

    P.S. I know publiar, I said I was through, but just picking up the loose ends of comments I hadn't seen. Wouldn't surprise me if you add some more lies or snide remarks that I can't overlook.Try to restrain from being such an ignorant lying fool and I can be done with all of you.

  93. Jim Robertson says:

    I guess "judge not" got kicked to the curb by Servant.

    No surprise there. Christianity is nothing if not paradoxical. Kill!; and yet Don't Kill! etc. I'm not afraid of what so clearly is not there. Your giving authority to one book as being the word of God is absurd. It's the Word of Abe or Irving. Yet you ascribe truth for all in that? You diestsdemand worship.While your God remains stum. 

    • Dan says:

      "The natural man does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God. For they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned. The spiritual man judges all things, but he himself is not subject to anyone's judgement." 1 Cor 2:14-15 

      You deny His Word and think that man wrote this wisdom? Are you serious? I guess it's true that you and publiar consider the Word to be foolishness and you just can never understand it, because then you would have to face your sinfulness and that's a place where neither prefer to go. Sad because the alternative shall be eternally horrible. Easier just to deny and not believe that the God who created everything even exists? I felt true compassion for you Jim, because of the molestation you suffered as a teen. Sorry you prefer to destroy those feelings with your hatred of the Only One who could truly help your life.

  94. Jim Robertson says:

    You're not your and "diestsdemand"

    And schtum not stum.

  95. Publion says:

    On then to ‘Dan’s of the 4th at 425PM:

    The only noteworthy bits here are:

    First, ‘Dan’ doth declare himself to be “one of His true Christians”. Nicely, that “His” might refer to God or, in a more creative interpretation, it might refer to ‘Dan’ himself, i.e. that ‘Dan’ is his own Christian, practicing his own Christianity – which is delivered to him through the bathroom mirror and the divine fax machine.

    Similarly, ‘Dan’ doth declare and pronounce as to who does and does not “qualify” to “judge anyone’s moral decency or status with the Almighty” – that bit of tea-leaf reading, apparently, is reserved to ‘Dan’, who tosses the leaves like a salad when he’s in the mood. Only ‘Dan’ gets to say who does and does not enjoy a good “status with the Almighty” – doncha know? – because his bathroom mirror tells him so.

  96. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 4th at 425PM:

    Second, ‘Dan’ has slyly taken an easy evasion for his implied threat (the 3rd at 229AM) that he hoped he would get no responses to that comment so that he “will have no reason to have to try to help any of you [Catholic “vultures”] from here on out”.

    I had pointed out (the 4th at 228PM) that “He won’t do any such thing, of course”.

    So – in another fine example of ‘Dan’s always-convenient misreadings – I had not said that he “was through”. I had said just the opposite: that he would have to keep on with his stuff because otherwise he couldn’t keep up his delusional status as ‘prophet’.

    Any reader who can suss out the sense of the bit about “just picking up the loose end of comments [‘Dan’] hadn’t seen” is welcome to share it here.

    What shouldn’t “surprise” him is that his material was inevitably going to have to be corrected due to his lack of chops.

    And then – marvelously – he concludes his “P.S.” by wishing that he “can be done with all of you”. Again, this is histrionic and deceptive: ‘Dan’ needs to spew his plop (that’s how he amassed his police and psychiatric record to begin with).

    • Dan says:

      I prefer God answer you, even though you still won't get it. 1 Cor 2:14-15 (KJV)

      "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man."

      So you can look that up in any Bible version you prefer, and you will find that it says the same thing in different words, with little, if any, change of meaning. You still won't understand or correctly interpret the meaning, because as the Scripture says, it is "foolishness unto him, neither can [you] know them, because they are spiritually discerned". It is virtually impossible for a blatant, compulsive liar to know or understand spiritual discernment, when you'd rather prefer to mock the Creator and His Precious Word. You even add more lies in claiming you're not mocking Him. Never met such a lying hypocrite.  servant

  97. Publion says:

    On the 5th at 1001PM ‘Dan’ will continue to deploy his presumptive delusions to see if he can extricate himself.

    This time around, he (perhaps wisely) won’t be saying too much himself, but instead – alas rather unwisely – will claim that “God” doth “answer” me. Thus the pericope.

    But the only way this pericope would work for ‘Dan’s delusional system is if one presumed that ‘Dan’ is that “he that is spiritual” who gets to “judgeth all things” and – had you been waittttinggggg forrrr itttttt? – also “is judged by no man”.

    Thus the delusional system is served and preserved because ‘Dan’ is simultaneously confirmed (if we presume the presumption that he wants us to presume) as both a) being the “spiritual” man and b) being beyond the judgment of any “natural man”.  Neato.

  98. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 5th at 1001PM.

    But it is equally (if not more) possible that ‘Dan’ is actually that “natural man” sunk in his own preoccupations and purposes, and receives not “the things of the Spirit of God” but instead merely his own delusions, costumed for his purposes as those “things of the Spirit of God”.

    But it’s actually worse than that. A purely “natural man” would live without giving God or His Scripture a thought. ‘Dan’ – however – has chosen to actually costume himself in “the things of the Spirit of God”, manipulating them for his own purposes.

  99. Dan says:

    "We realize that law is NOT enacted for the RIGHTEOUS, but for the lawless and rebellious, for the ungodly and sinful, for the unholy and profane, for killers of father and mother, for murderers, for the sexually immoral, for those practicing homosexuality, for slave traders and LIARS and PERJURERS [liars in court], and anyone else who is averse to sound teaching [hypocrites]." 1 Timothy 1:9-10

    "Better a thief than an inveterate LIARS, yet both will suffer disgrace; A LIAR'S way leads to dishonor, his shame remains ever with him." Sirach 20:24-25  UCCSB (NAB)

    "Don't disappoint any of your worshipers, but disappoint all DECEITFUL LIARS." Psalm 25:3 "LIARS accuse me of crimes I know nothing about." Psalm 35:11                                             "My enemies are LIARS! So let them be trapped by their boastful LIES." Psalm 59:12             "Your laws can be trusted! Protect me from cruel LIARS." Psalm 119:86

    Catholics: These are just a few verses from the Bible in regards to deceitful liars. So do you believe a compulsive deceitful habitual liar (publyin'), perpetuate consistent lies in regards to my mental state being delusional, because I represent a strong belief in God's Word? Do you accept and believe God's Word, or would you rather accept manipulations and deceitful misinterpretations of a fellow catholic hypocrite? Haven't you been lied to enough with the coverups and disgusting perversions and pedophilia of the church hierarchy? These sins should never even be mentioned among God's true followers. Your church has been fooling and deceiving you with all their excuses and lies.

    How dare publiar accuse me of some ulterior motives or scam, when all I've asked is that you look at the Lord's Word and decide who is telling the truth. I have no religion for you to join, but would like all to become true children of God, not fooled by the wolves in sheep's clothing. They only love their greed and filthy lusts, and will lie through their teeth to make you believe that they are the truth-tellers. Lying hypocrites from Hell, demons wishing to drag millions down into the depths with them.  Be not fooled by the wicked, especially liars and mockers of the One True God!   servant of God

     

     

     

  100. Jim Robertson says:

    So many words used here and so little common sense.

    Arguing about imaginary "friends" is fine for 4 year olds but we are all adults here.

    This propaganda site is here to never have a decent, adult problem solving conversation. It's here to tell Catholics that they, the church, are the real victims. Other wise we'd be solving problems like grown ups do. instead we have TMR and Catholic league etc. like cheerleaders at a football game. More accurately a wrestlng match where the winners are decided back stage before the show and all the rest is choreography and performance.

    We are supposed to imagine that P and Dan are fghting each other in their "Who's got the Real God" Apach Tango. They dance aroud and around as if choreographed.

    We are to take them seriously because they talk about "God". Because after all "God" is the most serious subject in the Universe.

    And all the while there is nothing there.

     

    • Dan says:

      Jim, I waited five days for you to respond with some "adult problem solving conversation", and this is what we get. I'm not sure who is more deceived, the followers of the catholic cult or the gay atheists who think they have some intellegence to add to the conversation?

      What exactly bothers you more, Jim? The fact that the Creator will take into account your homosexual immorality or the fact that you mock and criticize Him as much as ignorant publiar? Sodom and Gomorrah isn't convincing enough of God's punishment on the homosexual culture of those towns? We saw in our own time the punishment of AIDS on the homosexually immoral, mostly men who were involved in orgies with multiple men in bath houses. God held back His punishment, that those left may turn back from their sin and be forgiven for their unnatural lusts. You still think you are bigger or know more than the one who created you?

      "Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the LORD, and He will have compassion on him, and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon. For my thoughts are not your thoughts, nor are your ways My ways," declares the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways and my thoughts than your thoughts."  Isaiah 55:7-9

      God holds His hand out to you Jim, he knows your past and your present, and is willing to forgive in order to give you a much brighter future. If you wish instead to deny Him and His generous offer, then that shall be your own decision. He is unwilling to force Himself on anyone. Don't ever think you know more about His Creation than He does, because you shall be sorely mistaken. You're just not as big or wise as you think you are, and you surely have not in any way acted as the adult in this conversation.

      "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt and their ways are vile; there is no one who does good." Psalm 53:1  I don't think you're a fool Jim, but don't ever think yourself to be wiser than the Creator. You will be made to look like a fool.

  101. Publion says:

    On the 10th at 1112PM ‘Dan’ will send up a whole bunch of pericopes. As usual, they only work if one presumes the presumptions that ‘Dan’ wishes one to presume (such as presuming that ‘Dan’ has many “enemies” who are “liars”). He can quote them all he wants; the key is – as it has always been – whether they apply to him in the way that his delusional system requires.

    And the same goes for his “enemies”: the pericopes only work if one presumes that ‘Dan’ is truthy and it’s those who disagree with his stuff that are “liars”.

    ‘Dan’ has no “strong belief in God’s Word. ‘Dan’ only has a death-grip on his delusional  take on God’s Word. ‘Dan’ is in the ‘Dan’ business; God’s Word and Scripture are just costumes he has taken to give a patina of authority to his whackery.

    • Dan says:

      Let us all know when you're through with your compulsive lying and slandering. For the umpteenth time, catholic liars that slandered me had nothing to do with my material. They were blatant liars, like yourself, who seem to derive some sick pleasure from lying about others. Apparently you've yet to understand that there will be a high price to pay for every lying word to come from your forked tongue, hypocrite. Crawl back under the mud you slithered out from, Porky Perjuring Pig. I'm done with you wicked lying fools!  servant

  102. Publion says:

    Continuing with my comment on ‘Dan’s of the 10th at 1112PM:

    Having thus tried yet again to run his usual scam – trying to weasel his own interpretations in under cover of the quoted pericopes – ‘Dan’ then clutches his pearls and doth harrumph that I would “dare accuse” him “of some ulterior motive or scam”.

    But ‘Dan’ does not and never has and never can simply ‘ask’ that readers “look at the Lord’s Word and decide who is telling the truth”. The readers have to do much more, i.e. they have to accept ‘Dan’s interpretation according to the story ‘Dan’ has fashioned for himself as the spine of his delusional system. That is always his motive and constitutes the core of his scam.

  103. Publion says:

    On then to JR’s of the 11that 104AM:

    Once again, JR has chosen for this performance to don the Wig of “common sense” and then even tries to weasel himself into the status of adulthood (in more than the mere chronological sense); “we are all adults here”, he smarmily bleats.

    He then denounces “this propaganda site” as being “here to [ensure that ‘we’] never have a decent, adult problem-solving conversation”. And was his ever-expanding conspiracy skein supposed to have been such a conversation? And did we not rather adult-ly solve the problem of his own story, after finally working through his layers of smoke-blowing and sly deception?

    And how can you have a “backstage” on a website? And how could such a “backstage” ‘decide’ “the winners” beforehand? What we see here – yet again – is JR’s reversion to ‘conspiracy’ to excuse the failures of his own stuff; he’s the ‘victim’ – doncha see? – of a “backstage” conspiracy here (one that’s even “choreographed”).

    If he’s not a ‘winner’ here, it’s his own material that did the job.

  104. Dan says:

    Sorry ej, That you don't see your church as an evil cult. You disagree with God's description of idolatry, the making, worship and bowing down to statues. You don't see that they worship Mary as a replacement to Jesus Christ. Hail Holy Queen, our Life, our Sweetness and our Hope. Mother of God, sinless and assumed. Prayed to with repetitive prayers, Christ described as praying as heathens do. You refuse to face the facts that the cult is plagued with pedophiles and perverts, many of whose identities were kept secret through victim payoffs with Confidentiality Agreements. I have dealt with a couple of catholic liars and cowards in this forum, none more outstanding than lying publiar. I have brought to the attention of catholics so many quotes from the Lord's Word in which they fail to follow. I take very serious my use of words, and the church has painted itself with a "broad brush" of wickedness, down to it's very core and most definitely among it's pompous hierarchy. I may harbor hatred for the false religion and the evil hypocrites within, but do not harbor hatred for it's brainwashed sheep. I have absolutely no problem with my soul or my eternity. I know I'm saved by Christ's sacrifice on the cross, and need no purgatory, saints as mediators or any other falsehoods from anti-Biblical teachings. I think you should be a little more concerned with your eternity and your beliefs. Read the Bible often and you may come to know His Truth.

  105. Johnny K says:

    The fact is that Shero and Fr. Englehart were NOT GUILTY, but had their lives ruined by false accusations, complicit prosecutors, a flat-out evil Seth Williams, and a cowardly judge. THAT is what this thread is supposed to be about.